6/A?0 


BY-PATHS 
IN  HEBRAIC  BOOKLAND 


BY-PATHS 
IN  HEBRAIC  BOOKLAND 


BY 
ISRAEL  ABRAHAMS,  D.  D.,  M.  A. 

Author  of  "Jewish  Life  in  the  Middle  Ages,"  "Chapters  on 
Jewish  Literature,"  etc. 


PHILADELPHIA 
THE  JEWISH   PUBLICATION  SOCIETY  OF  AMERICA 

1920 


BY 

THE  JEWISH  PUBLICATION  SOCIETY  OF  AMERICA 


PREFACE 

Wayfarers  sometimes  use  by-paths  because  the 
highways  are  closed.  In  the  days  of  Jael,  so  the 
author  of  Deborah's  Song  tells  us,  circuitous  side- 
tracks were  the  only  accessible  routes.  In  the  un- 
settled condition  of  Israel  those  who  journeyed 
were  forced  to  seek  their  goal  by  roundabout  ways. 

But,  at  other  times,  though  the  open  road  is 
clear,  and  there  is  no  obstacle  on  the  way  of  com- 
mon trade,  the  traveller  may  of  choice  turn  to  the 
by-ways  and  hedges.  Not  that  he  hates  the  wider 
track,  but  he  may  also  love  the  less  frequented, 
narrower  paths,  which  carry  him  into  nooks  and 
glades,  whence,  after  shorter  or  longer  detours,  he 
reaches  the  highway  again.  Not  only  has  he  been 
refreshed,  but  he  has  won,  by  forsaking  the  main 
road,  a  fuller  appreciation  of  its  worth. 

Originally  writtermn  1913  for  serial  publication, 
the  papers  collected  in  this  volume  were  designed 
with  some  unity  of  plan.  Branching  off  the  main 
line  of  Hebraic  development,  there  are  many  by- 
paths of  the  kind  referred  to  above — by-paths  lead- 
ing to  pleasant  places,  where  it  is  a  delight  to  linger 

5 


2093288 


PREFACE 

for  a  while.  Some  of  the  lesser  expressions  of  the 
Jewish  spirit  disport  themselves  in  those  out-of-the- 
way  places.  Though  oft  neglected,  they  do  not 
deserve  to  be  treated  as  negligible. 

None  can  surely  guide  another  to  these  places. 
But  the  first  qualification  of  a  guide,  a  qualification 
which  may  atone  for  serious  defects,  is  that  he  him- 
self enjoys  the  adventure.  In  the  present  instance 
this  qualification  may  be  claimed.  For  the  writer 
has  turned  his  attention  chiefly  to  his  own  favor- 
ites, choosing  books  or  parts  of  books  which  ap- 
pealed to  him  in  a  long  course  of  reading,  and 
which  came  back  to  him  with  fragrant  memories 
as  he  set  about  reviewing  some  of  the  former  inti- 
mates of  his  leisure  hours.  The  review  is  not 
formal;  the  method  is  that  of  the  causerie,  not  of 
the  essay.  Some  of  the  books  are  of  minor  value, 
curiosities  rather  than  masterpieces;  in  others  the 
Jewish  interest  is  but  slight.  Yet  in  all  cases  the 
object  has  been  to  avoid  details,  except  in  so  far  as 
details  help  even  the  superficial  observer  to  get  to 
the  author's  heart,  to  place  him  in  the  history  of 
literature  or  culture.  Not  quite  all  the  authors 
noted  in  this  volume  were  Jews — the  past  tense  is 
used  because  it  was  felt  best  to  include  no  writers 
living  when  the  volume  was  compiled.  It  seemed, 

6 


PREFACE 

however,  right  that  certain  types  of  non-Jewish 
workers  in  the  Hebraic  field  ought  to  find  a  place, 
partly  from  a  sense  of  gratitude,  partly  because, 
without  laboring  the  point,  the  writer  conceives  that 
as  all  cultures  have  many  points  in  common,  so  it  is 
well  to  bear  in  mind  that  many  cultures  have  con- 
tributed their  share  to  produce  that  complex 
entity — the  Jewish  spirit.  Complex  yet  harmoni- 
ous, influenced  from  without  yet  dominated  by  a 
strong  inner  and  original  power,  the  Jewish  spirit 
reveals  itself  in  these  by-paths  as  clearly  as  on  the 
main  line. 

But,  though  some  such  general  idea  runs  through 
the  volume,  it  was  the  author's  intention  to  interest 
rather  than  instruct,  to  suggest  the  importance  of 
certain  authors  and  books,  perhaps  to  rouse  the 
reader  to  probe  deeper  than  the  writer  himself  has 
done  into  subjects  of  which  here  the  mere  surface  is 
touched.  The  writer  could  have  added  indefinitely 
to  these  papers,  but  this  selection  is  long  enough  to 
argue  Against  extending  it,  at  all  events  for  the 
present. 

Having  decided  to  stray  into  the  by-paths,  it 
sometimes  became  necessary  to  resist  the  tempta- 
tion to  turn  to  the  main  road.  This  necessity  ac- 
counts for  another  fact.  Fewer  books  are  treated 

7 


PREFACE 

of  the  older  period.  For  the  older  period  is  domi- 
nated by  Bible  and  Talmud,  and  these  were 
ex  hypothesi  outside  the  range.  So,  too,  the  scho- 
lastic masterpieces  and  the  greater  products  of 
mysticism  and  law  are  passed  over.  Yet,  though 
the  writer  did  not  consciously  start  with  such  a  de- 
sign, it  will  be  seen  that  accidentally  a  great  fact 
or  two  betray  themselves.  One  is  that,  in  the  Jew- 
ish variety,  technical  learning  can  never  be  wholly 
dissociated  from  what  we  more  commonly  name 
literature.  Some  books  which,  at  first  sight,  are 
merely  the  expression  of  scholarly  specialism  are 
seen,  on  investigation,  to  belong  to  culture  in  the 
aesthetic  no  less  than  in  the  rational  or  legal  sense. 
Again,  there  becomes  apparent  the  vital  truth  that 
Jewish  thought,  dependent  as  it  always  has  been 
on  environment,  is  also  independent.  For  we  see 
how  Jews  in  the  midst  of  Hellenistic  absolutism  re- 
mained pragmatical,  how  under  the  medieval  devo- 
tion to  a  stock-taking  of  the  past  Jews  were  to  a 
certain  extent  creative,  and  how  the  modernist  ten- 
dency to  disintegration  was  resisted  by  an  impulse 
towards  constructiveness. 

But,  to  repeat  what  has  already  been  indicated, 
the  author  had  no  such  grave  intentions  as  these. 
Many  of  the  papers  appeared  in  a  popular  weekly, 

8 


PREFACE 

the  London  Jewish  World,  the  editor  of  which 
kindly  conceded  to  the  writer  the  privilege  of  col- 
lecting them  into  a  book.  Some,  however,  were 
specially  written  for  this  volume.  All  have  been 
considerably  revised,  in  the  effort  to  make  them 
more  worthy  of  the  reader's  attention.  The  writer 
feels  that  this  effort,  despite  the  valuable  help  ren- 
dered by  Dr.  Halper  while  the  proofs  were  under 
correction,  has  been  imperfectly  successful.  The 
papers  can  have  little  in  them  to  deserve  attention. 
Nevertheless  there  is  this  to  be  urged.  Some  of  the 
topics  raised  are  apt  to  be  ignored.  Yet  it  is  not 
only  from  the  outstanding  masterpieces  of  litera- 
ture that  we  may  learn  wisdom  and  derive  pleasure. 
"  A  small  talent,"  said  Joubert,  "  if  it  keeps  within 
its  limits  and  rightly  fulfils  its  task,  may  reach  the 
goal  just  as  well  as  a  greater  one."  This  remark 
may  be  applied  to  what  may  seem  to  many  the 
minor  products  of  genius  or  talent.  Hence,  be  they 
termed  minor  or  major,  the  books  discussed  in  this 
volume  were  worthy  of  consideration.  Beyond 
doubt  most  of  them  belong  to  the  category  of  the 
significant  and  some  of  them  even  attain  the 
rank  of  the  epoch-making.  And  so,  without  fur- 
ther preface,  these  papers  are  offered  to  those 
familiar  as  well  as  to  those  unfamiliar  with  the 

9 


PREFACE 


works  themselves.  For  to  both  classes  may  be  ap- 
plied the  Latin  poet's  invocation:  "  Now  learn  ye 
to  love  that  loved  never;  and  ye  that  have  loved, 
love  anew." 


10 


CONTENTS  PAGE 


PREFACE 


5 


PART  I 

THE  STORY  OF  AHIKAR 17 

PHILO  ON  THE  "  CONTEMPLATIVE  LIFE  " 24 

JOSEPHUS  AGAINST  APION 32 

CAECILIUS  ON  THE  SUBLIME 39 

THE  PHOENIX  OF  EZEKIELOS 46 

THE  LETTER  OF  SHERIRA 53 

NATHAN  OF  ROME'S  DICTIONARY 60 

THE  SORROWS  OF  TATNU 67 

PART  II 

IBN  GEBIROL'S  "  ROYAL  CROWN  " 77 

BAR  HISDAI'S  "  PRINCE  AND  DERVISH  " 84 

THE  SARAJEVO  HAGGADAH 91 

A  PIYYUT  BY  BAR  ABUN 97 

ISAAC'S  LAMP  AND  JACOB'S  WELL 102 

"  LETTERS  OF  OBSCURE  MEN  " 108 

DE  Rossi's  "  LIGHT  OF  THE  EYES  " 116 

GUARINl4f&D  LUZZATTO 122 

HAHN'S  NOTE  BOOK 129 

LEON  MODENA'S  "  RITES  " 136 

PART  III 

MENASSEH  AND  REMBRANDT 147 

LANCELOT  ADDISON  ON  THE  BARBARY  JEWS 153 

THE  BODENSCHATZ  PICTURES 160 

11 


CONTENTS 

PAGE 

FIRST  JEWISH  PLAY 166 

ISAAC  PINTO'S  PRAYER-BOOK 171 

MENDELSSOHN'S  "  JERUSALEM  " 178 

HERDER'S  ANTHOLOGY 184 

WALKER'S  "  THEODORE  CYPHON  " 191 

HORACE  SMITH  or  THE  "  REJECTED  ADDRESSES  " 199 


PART  IV 

BYRON'S  "  HEBREW  MELODIES  " 207 

COLERIDGE'S  "  TABLE  TALK  " 214 

BLANCO  WHITE'S  SONNET 230 

DISRAELI'S  "  ALROY  "  226 

ROBERT  GRANT'S  "  SACRED  POEMS  " 233 

GUTZKOW'S  "  URIEL  ACOSTA  " 240 

GRACE  AGUILAR'S  "  SPIRIT  OF  JUDAISM  " 247 

ISAAC  LBESER'S  BIBLE 254 

LANDOR'S  "  ALFIERI  AND  SALOMON  " 260 

PART  V 

BROWNING'S  "  BEN  KARSHOOK  " 269 

K.  E.  FRANZOS'  "  JEWS  OF  BARNOW  " 276 

HERZBERG'S  "  FAMILY  PAPERS  " 283 

LONGFELLOW'S  "  JUDAS  MACCABJEUS  " 290 

ARTOM'S  SERMONS 297 

SALKINSON'S  "  OTHELLO  "  303 

"  LIFE  THOUGHTS  "  OF  MICHAEL  HENRY 311 

THE  POEMS  OF  EMMA  LAZARUS 319 

CONDER'S  "  TENT  WORK  IN  PALESTINE  " 325 

12 


CONTENTS 

PAGE 

KALISCH'S   "PATH   AND    GOAL" 333 

FRANZ  DELITZSCH'S  "  IRIS  " 340 

"  THE  PRONAOS  "  OF  I.  M.  WISE 347 

A  BAEDEKER  LITANY 353 

IMBER'S  SONG  359 

INDEX  365 


13 


ILLUSTRATIONS 

PAGE 

MENASSEH  BEN  ISRAEL  148 

TITLE-PAGE   OF  THE   FIRST   EDITION   OF   BYRON'S   "  HEBREW 

MELODIES  "    208 

GRACE  AGUILAR  248 

ISAAC  LEESER 254 

EMMA    LAZARUS    320 

ISAAC  MAYER  WISE 348 

NAPHTALI  HERZ  IMBF.R   360 


PART  I 


PART  I 
THE  STORY  OF  AHIKAR 

We  are  happily  passing  out  of  the  critical  ob- 
session, under  which  it  was  a  sign  of  ignorance  to 
attribute  a  venerable  age  to  the  records  of  the  past. 
All  the  old  books  were  written  yesterday,  or  at 
earliest  the  day  before !  Facts,  however,  are  stub- 
born; and  facts,  as  they  come  to  light,  justify  and 
re-affirm  our  fathers'  faith  in  the  antiquity  of  the 
world's  literature.  The  story  of  Ahikar  is  a  good 
illustration. 

In  the  course  of  the  Book  of  Tobit  more  than 
once  Achiachar  or  Ahikar  is  mentioned.  These 
allusions  are  verbal  only,  but  in  one  scene  the  refer- 
ence is  more  precise.  The  pious  Tobit  on  his  death- 
bed bids  hi^son  "  consider  what  Nadab  (Nadan) 
did  to  Achiachar,  who  brought  him  up  "  ( 14.  10). 

What  did  Nadan  do,  and  who  was  Ahikar?  It 
is  only  withhi  recent  years  that  a  complete  answer 
has  become  possible  to  these  questions.  The  older 
commentators  on  the  Apocrypha  were  much  wor- 
ried by  the  allusion,  and  had  to  be  content  with  the 
a  17 


BY-PATHS  IN  HEBRAIC  BOOKLAND 

blindest  guesses.  Some  versions  of  Tobit  had,  in 
place  of  the  words  quoted  above,  the  following: 
"  Consider  how  Aman  treated  Achiachar,  who 
brought  him  up."  Hence  the  suggestion  arose  that 
the  reference  was  to  Haman  and  Mordecai.  But 
the  Book  of  Esther  does  not  hint  that  Mordecai 
had  "  brought  up  "  Haman,  and  was  then  repaid 
by  the  latter's  ingratitude. 

But  in  1880,  G.  Hoffmann  discovered  the  clue. 
He  recognized  that  Tobit's  references  were  paral- 
leled in  a  story  found  in  Aesop's  Fables  and  in  the 
Arabian  Nights,  but  much  more  fully  recorded  in 
the  Story  of  Ahikar  preserved  in  several  versions, 
such  as  Syriac,  Arabic,  and  Armenian.  The  story, 
briefly  told  in  those  fuller  records,  is  as  follows : 

The  hero  is  Ahikar.  The  name  probably  means 
something  like  My  Brother  is  Precious,  or  A 
Brother  of  Preciousness,  or  possibly  (as  Dr.  Hal- 
per  suggests)  A  Man  of  Honor.  -He  was  grand 
vizier  of  Sennacherib,  the  king  of  Assyria.  Noted 
for  wisdom  as  for  statesmanship,  he  rose  to  a 
position  of  the  highest  dignity  and  wealth.  But 
he  had  no  son.  He,  accordingly,  adopted  his  infant 
nephew  Nadan,  and  reared  him  with  loving  care. 
He  furnished  him  with  eight  nurses,  fed  him 
on  honey,  clothed  him  in  fine  linen  and  silk,  and 

18 


THE  STORY  OF  AHIKAR 

made  him  lie  on  choice  carpets.  The  boy  grew 
big,  and  shot  up  like  a  cedar;  whereupon  Ahikar 
started  to  teach  him  book-lore  and  wisdom.  Na- 
dan  was  introduced  to  the  king,  who  readily 
agreed  to  regard  the  youth  as  his  minister's  son,  and 
made  promise  of  future  favors  to  one  in  whom  his 
faithful  vizier  was  so  much  interested.  The  narra- 
tive then  breaks  off  to  give  in  detail  the  wise  maxims 
which  Ahikar  sought  to  instil  into  Nadan;  maxims 
which  have  parallels  in  many  literatures,  including 
the  rabbinic.  Now,  Ahikar  was  grievously  mis- 
taken in  the  character  of  his  nephew.  Nadan 
seemed  to  listen  to  his  uncle's  wisdom,  but  all  the 
while  considered  his  monitor  a  dotard  and  a  bore. 
The  young  man  began  to  reveal  his  true  disposi- 
tion; his  cruelties  to  man  and  beast  were  such  that 
Ahikar  protested,  and  offended  Nadan  by  prefer- 
ring a  brother  of  the  latter.  Nadan,  in  revenge, 
plotted  Ahikadfs  downfall.  By  means  of  forged 
letters,  the  old  vizier  was  condemned  for  treachery, 
though  the  executioner,  mindful  of  a  similar  act  of 
mercy  previously  shown  to  himself,  secretly  spared 
Ahikar's  life.  Nor  was  the  day  distant  when  Sen- 
nacherib bewailed  the  loss  of  Ahikar's  services. 
Menacing  messages  came  from  Egypt  of  a  kind 
which  it  needed  an  Ahikar  to  deal  with.  To  the 

19 


BY-PATHS  IN  HEBRAIC  BOOKLAND 

king's  joy,  Ahikar  was  brought  out  from  his 
hiding-place;  he  was  again  taken  to  court,  and 
despatched  to  Egypt. 

Here,  once  more,  the  narrative  is  interrupted  to 
tell  the  details  of  these  Egyptian  experiences;  how 
Ahikar  satisfied  the  Pharaoh's  plan  of  "  raising  a 
castle  betwixt  heaven  and  earth  "  by  placing  boys 
on  the  backs  of  eaglets,  and  how  he  countered  the 
puzzling  questions  of  the  Egyptian  sages.  Thus, 
bidden  to  weave  a  rope  out  of  sand,  he  bored  five 
holes  in  the  eastern  wall  of  the  palace,  and  when 
the  sun  entered  the  holes  he  sprinkled  sand  in  them, 
and  "  the  sun's  furrow  (path)  began  to  appear  as 
if  the  sand  were  twined  in  the  holes."  Then, 
again,  the  king  of  Egypt  ordered  that  a  broken 
upper  millstone  should  be  brought  in.  "  Ahikar," 
said  the  king,  "  sew  up  for  us  this  broken  mill- 
stone." Ahikar,  who  throughout  tells  his  story  in 
the  first  person,  was  not  daunted.  "  I  went  and 
brought  a  nether  millstone,  and  cast  it  down  be- 
fore the  king,  and  said  to  him :  My  lord  the  king, 
since  I  am  a  stranger  here,  and  have  not  the  tools 
of  my  craft  with  me,  bid  the  cobblers  cut  me  strips 
from  this  lower  millstone  which  is  the  fellow  of 
the  upper  millstone ;  and  forthwith  I  will  sew  it  to- 
gether." The  king  laughed.  Ahikar  scored  all 

20 


THE  STORY  OF  AHIKAR 

round,  and  returned  home  to  Assyria  laden  with 
the  revenues  of  Egypt. 

The  third  part  of  the  story  relates  how  Nadan 
was  given  over  to  Ahikar.  His  uncle  bound  him 
with  iron  chains,  and  "  struck  him  a  thousand  blows 
on  the  shoulders  and  a  thousand  and  one  on  his 
loins  ";  and  while  Nadan  was  thus  imprisoned  in 
the  porch  of  the  palace  door,  living  on  "  bread  by 
weight  and  water  by  measure,"  being  compelled 
willy-nilly  to  listen,  Ahikar  proceeded  with  further 
lessons  in  wisdom.  "  My  son,"  he  says,  "  he  who 
does  not  hear  with  his  ears,  they  make  him  to  hear 
with  the  scruff  of  his  neck."  Then  there  follow 
many  wonderful  parables,  which  (as  with  the 
maxims)  are  similar  to  those  in  many  literatures. 
"  Thereat,"  ends  the  tale,  "  Nadan  swelled  up  like 
a  bag,  and  died.  And  to  him  that  doeth  good,  what 
is  good  shall  be  recompensed;  and  to  him  that 
doeth  evil,  wtat  is  evil  shall  be  rewarded.  But  he 
that  diggeth  a  pit  for  his  neighbor,  filleth  it  with 
his  own  stature.  And  to  God  be  glory,  and  His 
mercy  be  upon  us.  Amen." 

What  was  the  original  of  this  story?  Nothing 
in  the  romance  of  its  incidents,  or  in  the  marvel  of 
the  spread  of  it  and  its  maxims  and  its  incorporated 
fables  throughout  the  folk-lore  of  humanity,  ex- 

21 


BY-PATHS  IN  HEBRAIC  BOOKLAND 

cceds  the  dramatic  fact  that  a  large  fragment  of 
the  tale,  in  Aramaic,  has  been  found  in  Egypt 
among  other  Jewish  papyri  of  the  fifth  century  be- 
fore the  Christian  era  !  The  discovery  proves  many 
things,  among  them  two  being  most  significant. 
First,  the  Ahikar  story  is  far  older  than  people 
used  to  think,  and  thus  the  theory  that  the  story  of 
Ahikar  was  invented  to  explain  the  reference  in 
Tobit  is  once  for  all  disproved.  Second,,  it  is  at 
least  tenable  that  the  original  language  was  Ara- 
maic and  the  story  Jewish.  Here,  at  all  events,  we 
have  unquestionable  evidence  that  there  must  have 
been  among  the  Jews,  nearly  2,400  years  ago,  an 
impulse  towards  that  species  of  popular  tale  which 
so  deeply  affected  the  literature  and  poetry  of  the 
world.  Ahikar,  it  has  even  been  suggested,  is  the 
ultimate  source  of  at  least  one  of  the  New  Testa- 
ment parables.  But,  more  generally,  now  that  we 
know  that  the  story  of  Ahikar  was  at  so  early  a 
date  current  among  JCAVS,  we  shall  be  more  plausi- 
bly able  to  justify  the  belief,  long  ago  held  by  some, 
that  Aesop  and  other  similar  collections  of  fables 
do  truly  come  from  Jewish  originals.  At  any  rate, 
ancient  Jewish  parallels  must  have  been  in  circu- 
lation. 

22 


THE  STORY  OF  AHIKAR 

So  much  for  the  main  results  of  the  discovery. 
Small  details  of  interest  abound.  Tobit  bade  his 
son :  "  Pour  out  thy  bread  and  thy  wine  on  the 
graves  of  the  righteous  (4.  17)."  All  sorts  of 
changes  have  been  suggested  in  the  text.  But  the 
saying  is  found  in  the  versions  of  Ahikar,  and  may 
be  accepted  as  genuine.  It  is  not  necessarily  a 
pagan  rite;  it  has  analogy  with  the  funeral  meal 
which  long  prevailed  (and  still  prevails)  as  a  Jew- 
ish custom.  Even  more  interesting  seems  another 
detail  (of  the  Syriac  Version),  which  the  writers 
on  the  books  of  Ahikar  and  Tobit  have  overlooked. 
When  Tobit's  son  starts  on  his  quest,  his  dog  goes 
with  him.  This  is  a  remarkable  touch.  Nowhere 
else  in  ancient  Jewish  literature  does  the  dog  ap- 
pear as  man's  companion.  Nowhere  else?  Yes,  in 
one  other  place — in  the  story  of  Ahikar.  "  My 
son,"  says  the  vizier  to  Nadan,  "  strike  with  stones 
the  dog  that  has  left  his  own  master  and  followed 
after  thee."  jftere  we  see  the  dog  regarded  as  a 
comrade,  to  be  forcibly  discouraged  if  he  show 
signs  of  infidelity.  There  must  have  been  a  period, 
therefore,  when  the  olden  Jews  considered  the  dog 
in  a  light  quite  other  than  that  which  afterwards 
became  usual. 


23 


PHILO   ON   THE   "CONTEMPLATIVE 
LIFE  " 

Much  depends  on  the  mood  of  the  hour. 
Maimonides,  in  his  Eight  Chapters  and  in  the 
opening  section  of  his  Code,  acutely  remarks  that 
though  excess  in  any  moral  direction  is  vicious, 
nevertheless  it  may  be  necessary  for  a  man  to 
practise  an  extreme  in  order  to  bring  himself 
back  from  the  other  extreme  into  the  middle  path 
of  virtue.  Or,  to  use  another  phrase  of  the  same 
philosopher,  it  is  with  the  soul  as  with  the  body. 
To  adjust  the  equilibrium  it  is  proper  to  apply 
force  on  the  side  opposite  to  that  which  is  over- 
balanced. 

Hence  it  is  not  surprising  to  find  Philo  speaking, 
as  it  were,  with  two  voices  on  the  subject  of  the 
ascetic  life.  In  the  Alexandria  of  his  day  there 
was  at  one  time  prevalent  a  cult  of  self-renuncia- 
tion. This  cult  had  special  attraction  for  the 
young  and  fashionable.  They  joined  ascetic  socie- 
ties, and,  in  the  name  of  religion,  abandoned  all 
participation  in  worldly  affairs.  Philo  denounced 
these  boyish  millionaire  recluses  in  fine  style. 

24 


PHILO  ON  THE  "  CONTEMPLATIVE  LIFE  " 

Wealth  was  not  to  be  abused,  true ;  it  was,  however, 
to  be  used.  "  Shun  not  the  world,  but  live  well  in 
it,"  he  cried.  Do  not  avoid  the  festive  board,  but 
behave  like  gentlemen  over  your  wine.  It  is  all 
beautifully  said,  though  I  have  modernized  Philo's 
terms  somewhat.  "  Be  drunk  with  sobriety  "  is, 
however,  one  of  Philo's  very  own  phrases. 

But  there  is  this  other  side  to  consider.  Alexan- 
dria was  the  very  hotbed  of  luxury  and  extrava- 
gance. People  speak  about  the  inequalities  of 
modern  civilization,  and  seem  to  imagine  that  it  is 
a  new  thing  for  a  slum  and  a  palace  to  exist  side  by 
side.  But  this  was  exactly  the  condition  in  Alexan- 
dria at  about  the  beginning  of  the  Christian  era. 
Its  busy  and  gorgeous  bazaars,  as  Mr.  F.  C.  Cony- 
beare  has  said,  blazed  with  products  and  wares 
imported  and  designed  to  tickle  the  palates  and 
adorn  the  persons  of  the  aristocracy.  The  same 
marts  had  another  aspect,  narrow  and  noisy,  foul 
with  misery  ama  disease.  Wealth  and  vice  rubbed 
shoulders.  Passing  through  such  scenes,  Philo 
might  well  be  driven  to  see  the  superiority  of  ascet- 
icism over  indulgence.  Religion  after  all  is  renun- 
ciation. Idolatry,  said  Philo,  dwarfs  a  man's  soul, 
Judaism  enlarges  it.  Idolatry  may  be  compatible 
with  "  strong  wine  and  dainty  dishes,"  Judaism 

25 


BY-PATHS  IN  HEBRAIC  BOOKLAND 

prefers  a  meal  of  bread  and  hyssop.  In  speaking 
thus,  Philo  reminds  us  of  the  Pharisaic  saying: 
"  A  morsel  with  salt  shalt  thou  eat,  and  water 
drink  by  measure,  thou  shalt  sleep  upon  the  ground, 
and  live  a  life  of  painfulness,  the  while  thou  toilest 
in  the  Torah  "  (Pirke  Abot  6.  4.).  The  asso- 
ciation of  "  plain  living  "  with  "  high  thinking  " 
could  not  be  more  emphatically  expressed. 

Few  scholars  nowadays  doubt  the  Philonean 
authorship  of  the  treatise  "  On  the  Contemplative 
Life."  Conybeare,  Cohn  and  Wendland  have 
convinced  us  all,  or  nearly  all,  that  the  work  is 
really  Philo's.  At  first  sight,  no  doubt,  it  was  easier 
to  suppose  that  the  book  was  not  his.  It  seems  too 
cordial  in  its  praise  of  seclusion,  and  comes  too  near 
the  monastic  spirit.  But  the  Essenes  were  Jewish 
enough,  and  Philo's  Therapeutae  are  essentially  like 
the  Essenes.  "  Therapeutae  "  is  a  Greek  word 
which  literally  means  "  Servants,"  and  was  used  to 
denote  "  Worshippers  of  God."  The  community 
of  Therapeutae,  according  to  Philo's  description, 
was  settled  upon  a  low  hill  overlooking  Lake 
Mareotis,  not  far  from  Alexandria.  We  need  not 
go  into  details.  These  people  adopted  a  severely 
simple  life,  each  dwelling  alone,  spending  the  day 
in  his  private  "  holy  room,"  passing  the  hours 

26 


PHILO  ON  THE  "  CONTEMPLATIVE  LIFE  " 

without  food,  but  occupied  with  the  Law,  the 
Prophets,  and  the  Psalms.  On  the  Sabbath,  how- 
ever, they  abandoned  their  isolation,  and  met  in 
common  assembly,  to  listen  to  discourses.  The 
"  common  sanctuary "  was  a  double  enclosure, 
divided  by  a  wall  of  three  or  four  cubits,  so  as  to 
separate  the  women  from  the  men.  Women 
formed  part  of  the  audience,  "  having  the  same  zeal 
and  following  the  same  mode  of  life,"  all  practising 
celibacy.  Men  and  women  alike,  or  at  least  the 
most  zealous  of  them,  well-nigh  fasted  throughout 
the  week,  "  having  accustomed  themselves,  as  they 
say  the  grasshoppers  do,  to  live  upon  air;  for  the 
song  of  these,  I  suppose,  assuages  the  feeling  of 
want."  Their  Sabbath  meal  was  held  in  common, 
for  they  regarded  "  the  seventh  day  as  in  a  manner 
all  holy  and  festal,"  and,  therefore,  "  deem  it  wor- 
thy of  peculiar  dignity."  The  diet,  however,  "  com- 
prises nothing  expensive,  but  only  cheap  bread;  and 
its  relish  is  sajf,  which  the  dainty  among  them  pre- 
pare with  hyssop;  and  for  drink  they  have  water 
from  the  spring."  For,  continues  Philo,  "  they 
propitiate  the  mistresses  Hunger  and  Thirst,  which 
nature  has  set  over  mortal  creatures,  offering  noth- 
ing that  can  flatter  them,  but  merely  such  useful 
food  as  life  cannot  be  supported  without.  For  this 

27 


BY-PATHS  IN  HEBRAIC  BOOKLAND 

reason  they  eat  only  so  as  not  to  be  hungry,  and 
drink  only  so  as  not  to  thirst,  avoiding  all  surfeit  as 
dangerous  and  inimical  to  body  and  soul."  There 
is  only  one  relaxation  of  this  severity.  No  wine  is 
brought  to  table,  but  such  of  the  more  aged  as  are 
"  of  a  delicate  habit  of  life  "  are  permitted  to  drink 
their  water  hot. 

Of  course,  the  main  tendency  of  Judaism  has 
been  in  another  direction.  Fascinating  though 
Philo's  picture  of  the  community  of  Therapeutae 
is,  yet  it  cannot  be  felt  to  be  a  model  for  ordinary 
men  and  women.  From  time  to  time,  indeed,  Jews 
(like  the  disciples  of  Isaac  Luria)  followed  much 
the  same  course  of  life.  But  most  have  been  un- 
willing or  unable  to  accept  such  an  ideal  as  worthy 
of  imitation.  It  is  not  at  all  certain  that  Philo 
meant  it  to  be  a  model;  anyhow,  as  we  have  seen, 
he  was  not  always  in  the  same  mood.  Judah 
ha-Levi  opens  the  third  part  of  his  Khazari  with 
just  this  distinction  between  the  ideal  circumstances, 
under  which  the  ascetic  life  may  be  admirable,  and 
the  normal  conditions,  under  which  it  is  culpable. 
"  When  the  Divine  Presence  was  still  in  the  Holy 
Land  among  the  people  capable  of  prophecy,  some 
few  persons  lived  an  ascetic  life  in  deserts  "  with 
good  results.  But  nowadays,  continues  Judah 

28 


PHILO  ON  THE  "  CONTEMPLATIVE  LIFE  "      • 

ha-Levi,  "  he  who  in  our  time  and  place  and  people, 
'whilst  no  open  vision  exists'  (I  Samuel  3.  i), 
the  desire  for  study  being  small,  and  persons  with 
a  natural  talent  for  it  absent,  would  like  to  retire 
into  ascetic  solitude,  only  courts  distress  and  sick- 
ness for  soul  and  body."  The  real  pietist,  he  con- 
cludes, is  not  the  man  who  ignores  his  senses,  but 
the  man  who  rules  over  them.  And  this  was  really 
the  view  of  Philo  also,  as  we  find  it  in  his  other 
works.  "  The  bad  man,"  he  says,  "  treats  pleasure 
as  the  summum  bonum,  the  good  man  as  a  neces- 
sity, for  without  pleasure  nothing  happens  among 
mortals."  And  so  he  counsels  men  to  follow  the 
avocations  of  ordinary  life,  and  not  to  disdain  am- 
bition. "  In  fine,  it  is  necessary  that  they  who  would 
concern  themselves  with  things  divine  should,  first 
of  all,  have  discharged  the  duties  of  man.  It  is  a 
great  folly  to  thinlf  we  can  reach  a  comprehension 
of  the  greater  when  we  are  unable  to  overcome  the 
less.  Be  first  known  by  your  excellence  in  things 
human,  in  order  that  you  may  apply  yourselves  to 
excellence  in  things  divine."  (I  take  these  quota- 
tions from  C.  G.  Montefiore's  brilliant  Florilegium 
Philonis,  which  he  ought  to  reprint.)  Philo  un- 
doubtedly thought  more  highly  of  the  contempla- 
tive than  of  the  practical  life.  But  in  this  last 

29 


BY-PATHS  IN  HEBRAIC  BOOKLAND 

passage  he  gets  very  near  the  truth  when  he  treats 
the  former  as  only  noble  when  it  is  based  on  the 
latter.  It  is  another  aspect  of  the  rabbinic  truth 
that  "  not  study  but  conduct  "  is  the  end  of  virtue. 
Philo  does  not  contradict  this  truth ;  he  offers  to  our 
inspection  the  reverse  side  of  the  same  shield. 

One  other  point  remains.  The  reader  of  Philo's 
eulogy  of  the  Contemplative  Life  must  be  struck 
by  the  gaiety  of  these  ascetics.  Again  and  again 
Philo  speaks  of  their  joyousness.  They  "  compose 
songs  and  hymns  to  God  in  divers  strains  and  meas- 
ures." There  is  nothing  morose  about  them.  They 
build  up  the  edifice  of  virtue  on  a  foundation  of 
continence,  but  it  is  a  cheerful  devotion  after  all. 
Above  all  is  the  music,  the  singing.  They  have 
"  many  melodies  "  to  which  they  sing  old  songs  or 
newly  written  poems.  One  sings  in  solo,  and  then 
they  all  "  give  out  their  voices  in  unison,  all  the 
men  and  all  the  women  together  "  joining  in  "  the 
catches  and  refrains,"  and  "  a  full  and  harmonious 
symphony  results."  Philo  grows  ecstatic.  "  Noble 
are  the  thoughts,  and  noble  the  words  of  their 
hymn,  yea,  and  noble  the  choristers.  But  the  end 
and  aim  of  thought  and  words  and  choristers  alike 
is  holiness."  And  this  summary  ought  to  be  appli- 
cable to  every  form  of  Jewish  life,  to  those  phases 

30 


PHILO  ON  THE  "  CONTEMPLATIVE  LIFE  " 

particularly  which  reject  the  excesses  of  asceticism. 
"  Serve  the  Lord  with  joy,"  says  the  hundredth 
Psalm.  True  we  must  have  the  joy;  but  we  must 
also  not  omit  the  service. 


31 


JOSEPHUS  AGAINST  APION 

"  Buffon,  the  great  French  naturalist,"  as  Mat- 
thew Arnold  reminds  us,  "  imposed  on  himself  the 
rule  of  steadily  abstaining  from  all  answer  to  at- 
tacks made  upon  him."  This  attitude  of  digni- 
fied silence  has  often  been  commended.  In  one 
of  his  wisest  counsels,  Epictetus  recommended 
his  friends  not  to  defend  themselves  when  at- 
tacked. If  a  man  speaks  ill  of  you,  said  the  Stoic, 
you  should  only  reply :  "  Good  sir,  you  must  be 
ignorant  of  many  others  of  my  faults,  or  you 
would  not  have  mentioned  only  these."-  An  older 
than  Epictetus  gave  similar  advice.  Sennacherib's 
emissary,  the  Rabshakeh,  had  insolently  assailed 
Hezekiah;  "but  the  people  held  their  peace,  for 
the  king's  commandment  was :  Answer  him  not  " 
(II  Kings  1 8.  36).  On  this  last  text  a  fine  homily 
may  be  found  in  a  printed  volume  of  the  late 
Simeon  Singer's  Sermons.  Mr.  Singer  illustrated 
his  counsel  of  restraint  by  a  reference  to  Josephus. 
Apion  more  than  1,800  years  ago  had  traduced  the 
Jews,  and  Josephus  demolished  his  slanders  in  "  as 
powerful  a  piece  of  controversial  literature  as  is  to 
be  found."  "  But,"  continued  the  preacher,  "  note 

32 


JOSEPHUS  AGAINST  APION 

the  irony  of  the  situation.  But  for  Josephus'  reply, 
Apion  would  long  have  been  forgotten  " ;  not  his 
name,  but  certainly  the  details  of  his  typical  anti- 
Semitism. 

This  fact,  however,  does  not  carry  with  it  the 
conclusion  that  Josephus  rendered  his  people  an  ill- 
service.  There  are  two  orders  of  Apologetics — 
the  destructive  and  the  constructive.  Apologia 
was  originally  a  legal  term  which  denoted  the  speech 
of  the  defendant  against  the  plaintiff's  charges. 
As  we  know  abundantly  well  from  the  forensic 
giants  of  the  classical  oratory — such  as  Demos- 
thenes and  Cicero — these  defences  were  largely 
made  up  of  abuse  of  the  other  side.  Josephus  was 
an  apt  pupil  of  these  masters.  His  abuse  of  Apion 
leaves  nothing  to  the  imagination;  everything  is 
formulated,  and  with  scathing  particularity.  Jose- 
phus, it  is  true,  does  not  seem  to  have  been  unjust. 
Rarely,  if  ever,  has  an  out-and-out  anti-Semite  pos- 
sessed a  pleasing  personality.  Apion  was  a  gram- 
marian of  note,  but  there  is  much  evidence  as  to 
his  unamiable  characteristics.  The  emperor  Tibe- 
rius, who  knew  a  braggart  when  he  saw  one,  called 
Apion  "  cymbalum  mundi  " — a  world-drum,  mak- 
ing the  universe  ring  with  his  ostentatious  garru- 
lity. Aulus  Gellius  records  his  vanity ;  Pliny  accuses 
3  33 


BY-PATHS  IN  HEBRAIC  BOOKLAND 

him  of  falsehood  and  charlatanism.  Josephus  was, 
therefore,  not  going  beyond  the  facts  when  he  de- 
scribes him  as  a  scurrilous  mountebank.  It  cannot 
be  denied,  moreover,  that  Josephus  scores  heavily 
against  his  opponent,  in  solid  argument  as  well  as 
in  verbal  invective.  If  the  Jewish  historian  made 
Apion  immortal,  it  was  a  deathless  infamy  that  he 
secured  for  him. 

Certainly,  too,  Josephus  successfully  rebuts 
Apion's  specific  libels :  the  most  silly  of  them,  how- 
ever, antedated  Apion  and  survived  him.  Tacitus, 
indeed,  seems  to  have  gathered  his  own  weapons 
out  of  Apion's  armory,  and  the  Roman  repeats  the 
Alexandrian's  libel  that  in  Jerusalem  an  ass  was 
adored.  Those  who  are  interested  in  this  legend 
of  ass-worship  may  turn  to  a  learned  article  by 
Dr.  S.  Krauss  in  the  Jewish  Encyclopedia  (vol.  ii, 
p.  222).  It  has  been  suggested  that  the  charge 
arose  from  a  confusion  between  the  Jews  and  cer- 
tain Egyptian  or  Dionysian  sects.  Others  believe 
that  at  bottom  there  lies  a  misunderstanding  of  the 
"  foundation-stone,"  which,  according  to  talmudic 
tradition,  was  placed  in  the  ark  during  the  second 
temple.  The  upper  millstone  was  called  by  the 
Greeks  "  the  ass,"  for  its  tedious  turning  resembled 
an  ass's  burdensome  activity.  But,  be  the  explana- 

34 


JOSEPHUS  AGAINST  APION 

tion  what  it  may,  the  ignorance  of  a  professed  expert 
such  as  Apion  was  inexcusable.  Yet,  most  grimly 
amusing  of  all  Apion's  charges  is  his  repetition  of 
the  ever-recurrent  libel  that  the  Jews  were  haters 
of  their  fellow-men.  Never  was  there  a  more  per- 
fect illustration  of  Aesop's  fable  of  the  wolf  and  the 
lamb :  the  hated  transformed  into  the  haters ! 
Apion  was  a  fine  type  of  lover.  Off  to  Rome  went 
he,  leading  the  Alexandrian  deputation  against  the 
Jews  (who  were  championed  by  Philo) ,  denouncing 
them  to  the  Caesar,  and  using  every  artifice  to  incite 
the  imperial  animosity.  With  a  heart  bitter  with 
hostility,  Apion  would  be  a  fitting  assailant  of  the 
"  haters  of  mankind."  It  is  one  of  the  curiosities 
of  fate  that,  apart  from  what  Josephus  has  told  of 
him,  Apion  is  best  remembered  as  the  author  or 
transmitter  of  the  story  of  Androcles  and  the  lion. 
Apion  was  neither  the  first  nor  the  last  to  have  a 
kindlier  feeling  for  a  wild  beast  than  for  a  fellow- 
man. 

To  all  the  points  adduced  by  Apion  Josephus 
makes  a  triumphant  answer.  But  his  book,  termed 
rather  inaptly  Against  Apion,  would  not  deserve 
its  repute  merely  because  it  demolished  a  particu- 
larly malignant  opponent.  The  book  really  be- 
longs to  Apologetic  of  the  second  of  the  two  orders 

35 


BY-PATHS  IN  HEBRAIC  BOOKLAND 

distinguished  above.  Higher  far  than  the  destruc- 
tive Apologetic  is  the  constructive,  which  rebuts  a 
falsehood,  not  by  denouncing  the  liar,  but  by  pre- 
senting the  truth.  "  Great  is  truth,  and  it  will  pre- 
vail," is  the  maxim  of  an  ancient  Jewish  book 
(I  Esdras  4.  41 ) ,  a  maxim  well  known  in  substance 
to  Josephus  himself  (Antiquities,  xi.  3).  "Who 
ever  knew  truth  put  to  the  worse  in  a  free  and  open 
encounter?  "  asks  Milton.  If  we  once  give  up  con- 
fidence in  the  unconquerable  power  of  truth  to  win 
in  the  end,  we  have  already  made  an  end  of  human 
hope.  Apologetic,  then,  of  the  better  type  attaches 
itself  to  this  belief  in  the  inherent  virtue  of  truth. 
It  meets  the  enemy  not  with  weapons  similar  to  his 
own,  but  with  a  shield  impervious  to  all  weapons. 

Josephus  can  sustain  this  test.  Judged  by  the 
constructive  standard,  the  treatise  Against  Apion 
is  a  masterpiece.  That  the  Jews  were  an  ancient 
people  with  an  age-long  record  of  honor,  and  not 
a  race  of  recent  and  disreputable  upstarts,  Josephus 
proves  by  citations  from  older  writers  who,  but  for 
these  citations,  would  be  even  less  known  than 
they  now  are.  It  is  not,  however,  on  such  argu- 
ments that  Josephus  chiefly  rests  his  case.  The 
external  history  of  the  Jews,  their  glorious  par- 
ticipation in  the  world's  affairs — these  are  much. 

36 


JOSEPHUS  AGAINST  APION 

But  there  is  somthing  which  is  far  more.  "  As  for 
ourselves,  we  neither  inhabit  a  maritime  country, 
nor  delight  in  commerce,  nor  in  such  intercourse 
with  other  men  as  arises  from  it;  but  the  cities  we 
dwell  in  are  remote  from  the  sea,  and  as  we  have 
a  fruitful  country  to  dwell  in,  we  take  pains  in  cul- 
tivating it.  But  our  principal  care  of  all  is  to  edu- 
cate our  children  well,  and  to  observe  the  laws,  and 
we  think  it  to  be  the  most  necessary  business  of  our 
whole  life  to  keep  that  religion  that  has  been  handed 
down  to  us  "  ( i.  12).  This  passage  is  famous  both 
for  its  denial  of  the  supposed  natural  bent  of  Jews 
to  commerce  and  for  its  assertion  that  education 
is  the  principal  purpose  of  Jewish  endeavor.  Jo- 
sephus,  especially  in  the  second  book  of  his  Apology, 
expounds  Judaism  as  life  and  creed  in  glowing 
terms.  This  exposition  is  one  of  our  main  sources 
of  information  for  the  Judaism  of  the  first  century 
of  the  Christian  era.  His  picture  of  life  under  the 
Jewish  law  is  a  panegyric,  but  praise  is  not  always 
partiality.  Is  it  an  exaggerated  claim  that  Josephus 
makes  on  behalf  of  Judaism?  Surely  not.  "I 
make  bold  to  say,"  exclaims  Josephus  in  his  perora- 
tion, "  that  we  are  become  the  teachers  of  other 
men  in  the  greatest  number  of  things,  and  those 
the  most  excellent.  For  what  is  more  excellent 

37 


BY-PATHS  IN  HEBRAIC  BOOKLAND 

than  unshakable  piety  ?  What  is  more  just  than  obe- 
dience to  the  laws?  And  what  is  more  advantageous 
than  mutual  love  and  concord,  and  neither  to  be 
divided  by  calamities,  nor  to  become  injurious  and 
seditious  in  prosperity,  but  to  despise  death  when 
we  are  in  war,  and  to  apply  ourselves  in  peace  to 
arts  and  agriculture,  while  we  are  persuaded  that 
God  surveys  and  directs  everything  everywhere. 
If  these  precepts  had  either  been  written  before  by 
others,  or  more  exactly  observed,  we  should  have 
owed  them  thanks  as  their  disciples,  but  if  it  is  plain 
that  we  have  made  more  use  of  them  than  other 
men,  and  if  we  have  proved  that  the  original  inven- 
tion of  them  is  our  own,  let  the  Apions  and  Molos, 
and  all  others  who  delight  in  lies  and  abuse,  stand 
confuted." 

There  were  grounds  on  which  contemporary 
Jews  had  just  cause  for  complaint  against  Josephus. 
He  lacked  patriotism.  But  only  in  the  political 
sense.  When  Judea  was  invaded,  he  did  not  stand 
firm  in  resistance  to  Rome.  But  when  Judaism  was 
calumniated,  he  was  a  true  patriot.  He  stands  high 
in  the  honorable  list  of  those  who  championed  the 
Jewish  cause  without  thought  of  self.  Or,  rather, 
such  self-consciousness  as  he  displays  is  communal, 
not  personal.  When  he  pleads  his  people's  cause, 
his  pettinesses  vanish,  he  is  every  inch  a  Jew. 

38 


CAECILIUS  ON  THE  SUBLIME 

Favorable  remarks  on  Hebrew  literature  are 
very  rare  in  the  Greek  writers.  One  of  the  most 
significant  is  contained  in  the  ninth  section  of 
Longinus'  famous  treatise  on  the  Sublime. 

This  Greek  author — it  will  soon  be  seen  why  the 
name  Caecilius  and  not  Longinus  appears  in  the 
title  of  this  article — analyses  sublimity  of  style  into 
five  sources:  i)  grandeur  of  thought;  2)  spirited 
treatment  of  the  passions;  3)  figures  of  thought 
and  speech;  4)  dignified  expression;  5)  majesty  of 
structure.  Longinus  points  out  that  the  first  two 
conditions  of  sublimity  depend  mainly  on  natural 
endowments,  whereas  the  last  three  derive  assist- 
ance from  art. 

It  is  when  illustrating  the  first  of  the  five  ele- 
ments that  our  author  refers  to  the  Bible.  The 
most  important  of  all  conditions  of  the  Sublime  is 
"  a  certain  lofty  cast  of  mind."  Such  sublimity  is 
"  the  image  of  greatness  of  soul."  As  he  beauti- 
fully says:  "  It  is  only  natural  that  their  words 
should  be  full  of  sublimity,  whose  thoughts  are  full 
of  majesty."  Longinus,  accordingly,  refuses  to 

39 


BY-PATHS  IN  HEBRAIC  BOOKLAND 

praise   without   reserve    Homer's   picture   of   the 
"  Battle  of  the  Gods  " : 

A  trumpet  sound 

Rang  through  the  air,  and  shook  the  Olympian  height, 
Then  terror  seized  the  monarch  of  the  dead, 
And,  springing  from  his  throne,  he  cried  aloud 
With  fearful  voice,  lest  the  earth,  rent  asunder 
By  Neptune's  mighty  arm,  forthwith  reveal 
To  mortal  and  immortal  eyes  those  halls 
So  drear  and  dank,  which  e'en  the  gods  abhor. 

An  impious  medley,  Longinus  terms  this,  a  per- 
fect hurly-burly,  terrible  in  its  force  fulness,  but 
overstepping  the  bounds  of  decency.  (I  take  these 
and  other  phrases  from  Mr.  H.  L.  Havell's  fine 
translation).  Far  to  be  preferred  are  those 
Homeric  passages  which  "  exhibit  the  divine  nature 
in  its  true  light  as  something  spotless,  great,  and 
pure."  He  instances  the  lines  in  the  Iliad  on 
Poseidon,  though  there  does  not  seem  much  to 
choose  between  them  and  the  passage  condemned 
above.  But  then  follows  the  remarkable  para- 
graph which  is  the  reason  why  I  have  chosen 
Longinus  for  a  place  in  this  gallery:  "  And  thus 
also  the  lawgiver  of  the  Jews,  no  ordinary  man, 
having  formed  an  adequate  conception  of  the 
Supreme  Being,  gave  it  adequate  expression  in  the 

40 


CAECILIUS  ON  THE  SUBLIME 

opening  words  of  his  Laws:  God  said:  Let  there 
be  light,  and  there  was  light;  let  there  be  earth,  and 
there  was  earth." 

Few  will  dispute  that  this  passage  in  Genesis  be- 
longs to  the  sublimest  order  of  literature.  It  is  of 
the  utmost  interest  that  Longinus  (whoever  he 
was)  should  have  recognized  this  fact.  Whoever 
he  was — whether  the  true  Longinus,  or  an  unknown 
rhetorician  of  the  first  century.  Whether  it  be- 
longs to  the  age  of  Augustus  or  Aurelian,  it  is 
equally  noteworthy  that  the  Greek  writer  should 
have  admitted  that  the  sublime  might  be  exhibited 
by  Moses  as  well  as  by  Homer.  It  is  quite  clear, 
however,  that  Longinus  did  not  take  his  quotation 
from  the  Hebrew  Bible  itself  or  from  the  Greek 
translation.  Had  he  known  the  Bible,  he  must 
have  made  much  fuller  use  of  it.  Read  his  analysis 
of  the  sublime  quoted  above.  He  could,  and  would, 
have  illustrated  every  one  of  his  five  conditions 
from  the  Bible,  had  he  been  acquainted  with  it. 
Moreover,  the  quotation  from  Genesis  is  inexact. 
There  is  no  text:  God  said:  Let  there  be  earth, 
and  there  was  earth.  Obviously,  as  Theodore 
Reinach  points  out,  the  reference  is  taken  from  the 
sense,  not  the  words,  of  Genesis  I.  9  and  10. 
Longinus,  therefore,  either  knew  it  from  hearsay, 

41 


BY-PATHS  IN  HEBRAIC  BOOKLAND 

or  he  had  found  the  quotation  in  the  course  of  his 
reading. 

This  latter  suggestion  was  made  as  long  ago  as 
1711  by  Schurzfleisch — how  Matthew  Arnold 
would  have  jibed  at  a  man  with  such  a  name  com- 
menting on  the  Sublime!  Longinus  quotes  a  previ- 
ous treatise  on  the  Sublime  by  a  certain  Caecilius. 
His  predecessor,  says  Longinus,  wasted  his  efforts 
"  in  a  thousand  illustrations  of  the  nature  of  the 
Sublime,"  while  he  failed  to  define  the  subject.  Be 
that  as  it  may,  Longinus  quotes  Caecilius  several 
times,  especially  for  these  very  illustrations.  It  is 
by  no  means  improbable,  then,  that  Longinus' 
reference  to  Genesis  was  derived  from  Caecilius, 
who  may  have  paraphrased  from  memory  rather 
than  have  quoted  with  the  Bible  before  him.  Now, 
Suidas  informs  us  that  Caecilius  was  reported  to  be 
a  Jew.  Reinach  (Revue  des  Etudes  Juices,  vol. 
xxvi,  pp.  36-46)  has  provided  full  ground  for  ac- 
cepting the  information  of  Suidas,  which  is  now 
generally  adopted  as  true. 

Caecilius  belonged  to  the  first  century  of  the 
current  era,  and,  born  in  Sicily,  the  offspring  of  a 
slave,  he  betook  himself  as  a  freedman  to  Rome, 
where  he  won  considerable  note  as  a  writer  on 
rhetoric.  The  Characters  of  the  Ten  Orators  was 

42 


CAECILIUS  ON  THE  SUBLIME 

one  of  his  most  important  books;  several  histories 
are  ascribed  to  him ;  and,  as  we  have  seen,  he  wrote 
a  formal  treatise  on  the  Sublime,  which  gave  rise 
to  the  better-known  work  attributed  to  Longinus. 
It  is  not  clear  whether  Caecilius  was  a  born  Jew  or 
a  proselyte.  Probably  the  theory  that  best  fits  the 
facts  is  that  of  Schurer.  We  may  suppose  that  the 
rhetorician's  father  was  brought  to  Rome  as  a 
Jewish  slave  by  Pompey,  and  was  then  sold  to  a 
Sicilian.  In  Sicily,  the  son,  who  bore  the  name 
Archagathos,  received  a  Greek  education,  and  was 
freed  by  a  Roman  of  the  Caecilius  clan.  The 
freedman  would  drop  his  own  name,  and  adopt  the 
family  name  of  his  benefactor,  according  to  com- 
mon practice.  Schurer  offers  a  very  acute,  and  I 
think  conclusive,  argument  against  the  view  that 
Caecilius  was  a  convert  to  Judaism.  A  proselyte 
would  have  exhibited  much  more  zeal  for  his  new 
faith.  In  the  works  of  Caecilius,  I  may  add,  his 
Judaism  seems  more  a  reminiscence  than  a  vital 
factor.  It  is,  on  the  whole,  more  likely  that  he 
came  of  Jewish  ancestry  than  that  he  was  himself 
a  new-made  Jew.  Reinach  contends  that  because 
he  was  a  proselyte,  Caecilius  knew  the  Bible  only 
superficially,  and  hence  arose  his  misquotation  of 
Genesis.  Is  that  a  probable  view  to  take?  If  we 

43 


BY-PATHS  IN  HEBRAIC  BOOKLAND 

conceive,  with  Schiirer,  that  the  father  of  Caecilius, 
a  born  Jew,  had  passed  through  such  vicissitudes, 
being  carried  a  slave  from  Syria  to  Rome,  trans- 
ferred into  an  alien  environment  in  Sicily,  we  can 
well  understand  that  the  son  would  possess  but  a 
superficial  memory  of  the  Bible.  On  the  other 
hand,  a  proselyte  would  have  become  a  devotee  to 
the  Scriptures,  the  beauties  of  which  had  burst 
upon  his  mind  for  the  first  time.  He  would  not 
misquote.  The  chief  Jewish  translators  of  the  Bible 
into  Greek  (apart,  of  course,  from  the  oldest  Alex- 
andrian version)  were,  curiously  enough,  proselytes 
to  Judaism.  Perhaps  it  would  be  too  far-fetched  to 
suggest  that  Caecilius  had  a  particular  reason  to 
remember  the  first  chapter  of  Genesis.  His  orig- 
inal name,  Archagathos,  is  not  a  bad  translation  of 
the  Hebrew  "  very  good  "  (fob  meod)  which  oc- 
curs prominently  in  the  story  of  the  Creation. 

Unfortunately,  none  of  the  works  of  Caecilius  is 
preserved.  We  know  him  only  by  a  few  frag- 
ments. Plutarch  described  him  as  "  eminent  in  all 
things,"  yet  neither  Schiirer  in  his  earlier  editions, 
nor  Graetz  in  any  edition,  placed  him  where  he 
ought  to  be — to  use  Reinach's  phraseology — in  the 
phalanx  of  the  great  Jewish  Hellenists,  with  Aris- 
tobulus,  Philo,  and  Josephus.  Caecilius  was  the 

44 


CAECILIUS  ON  THE  SUBLIME 

restorer  of  Atticism  in  literature,  a  piquant  role 
for  a  Jew  to  play.  Yet  it  is  a  part  the  Jew  has 
often  filled.  An  instructive  essay  could  be  written 
on  the  services  rendered  by  Hebrews  to  the  spread 
of  Hellenism,  not  merely  in  the  ancient  world,  but 
also  in  the  medieval  and  modern  civilizations. 


45 


THE  PHOENIX  OF  EZEKIELOS 

"  The  plumage,"  writes  Herodotus  (ii.  73),  "  is 
partly  red,  partly  golden,  while  the  general  form 
and  size  are  almost  exactly  like  the  eagle."  The 
Greek  historian  was  describing  the  phoenix,  the 
fabled  bird  which  lived  for  five  hundred  years. 
According  to  another  version,  she  then  consumed 
herself  in  fire,  and  from  the  ashes  emerged  again 
in  youthful  freshness.  Herodotus  likens  the 
phoenix  to  the  eagle,  and  the  reader  of  some  of  the 
Jewish  commentaries  on  the  last  verse  of  Isaiah  40 
and  the  fifth  verse  of  Psalm  103  will  find  refer- 
ences to  similar  ideas.  In  particular  to  be  noted  is 
Kimhi's  citation  of  Sa'adya's  reference  to  the  be- 
lief that  the  eagle  acquired  new  wings  every  twelve 
years,  and  lived  a  full  century.  Such  fancies  easily 
attached  themselves  to  Isaiah's  phrase  and  to  the 
psalmist's  words:  "  Thy  youth  is  renewed  like  the 
eagle."  The  biblical  metaphors,  in  sober  fact, 
merely  allude  to  the  fullness  of  life,  high  flight,  and 
vigor  of  the  eagle;  there  is  nothing  whatever  that 
is  mythical  about  them. 

46 


THE  PHOENIX  OF  EZEKIELOS 

What  passes  for  one  of  the  most  famous  de- 
scriptions of  the  phoenix  is  contained  in  the  well- 
known  Greek  drama  of  the  Exodus  (or  rather 
Exagoge)  written  by  the  Jewish  poet,  Ezekielos. 
This  writer  probably  flourished  rather  more  than 
a  century  before  the  Christian  era.  It  is  commonly 
supposed  that  he  lived  in  the  capital  of  the  Ptole- 
mies, in  Alexandria;  but  it  has  been  suggested  by 
Kuiper  that  his  home  was  not  in  Egypt,  but  in 
Palestine,  in  Samaria.  If  that  be  so,  it  is  a  remark- 
able phenomenon.  We  should  not  wonder  that  a 
Jew  in  Alexandria  composed  Greek  dramas  on 
biblical  themes,  with  the  twofold  object  of  present- 
ing the  history  of  Israel  in  attractive  form  and  of 
providing  a  substitute  for  the  heathen  plays  which 
monopolized  the  ancient  theatre.  But  that  such 
dramas  should  be  produced  soon  after  the  Macca- 
bean  age  in  Palestine  would  imply  an  unexpected 
continuity  of  the  influences  of  Greek  manners  in 
the  homeland  of  the  Jews.  Ere  we  could  accept 
the  theory  of  a  Palestinian  origin  for  Ezekielos, 
we  should  need  far  stronger  arguments  than  Kuiper 
adduces  (Revue  des  Etudes  Juives,  vol.  xlvi, 
p.  48,  seq.). 

The  drama  of  the  Exodus — which  was  appar- 
ently written  to  be  performed- — follows  the  biblical 

47 


BY-PATHS  IN  HEBRAIC  BOOKLAND 

story  with  some  closeness.  We  are  now,  however, 
interested  in  a  single  episode,  preserved  for  us 
among  the  fragments  of  Ezekielos  as  quoted  by 
Eusebius  (Prep.  Evangel,  ix.  30).  A  beautiful 
picture  of  the  twelve  springs  of  Elim  and  of  its 
seventy  palms  is  followed  by  a  description  of  the 
extraordinary  bird  that  appeared  there.  I  take 
the  passage  from  Gifford's  Eusebius  (iii,  p.  475). 
A  character  of  the  play,  after  the  Greek  manner,  is 
reporting  to  Moses : 

Another  living  thing  we  saw,  more  strange 
And  marvellous  than  man  e'er  saw  before, 
The  noblest  eagle  scarce  was  half  as  large; 
His  outspread  wings  with  varying  colors  shone; 
The  breast  was  bright  with  purple,  and  the  legs 
With  crimson  glowed,  and  on  the  shapely  neck 
The  golden  plumage  shone  in  graceful  curves; 
The  head  was  like  a  gentle  nestling's  formed; 
Bright   shone  the  yellow   circlet   of  the   eye 
On  all  around,  and  wondrous  sweet  the  voice. 
The  king  he  seemed  of  all  the  winged  tribe, 
As  soon  was  proved ;  for  birds  of  every  kind 
Hovered  in  fear  behind  his  stately  form; 
While  like  a  bull,  proud  leader  of  the  herd, 
Foremost  he  marched  with  swift  and  haughty  step. 

Gifford  has  no  hesitation  in  accepting  the  com- 
mon identification  of  this  bird  with  the  phoenix. 
Obviously,  however,  Ezekielos  says  nothing  of  the 

48 


THE  PHOENIX  OF  EZEKIELOS 

mythical  properties  of  the  bird;  he  merely  pre- 
sents to  us  a  super-eagle  of  gorgeous  plumage  and 
splendid  stature,  unnatural  but  not  supernatural. 
Even  the  magnificence  of  the  superb  bird  pictured 
by  Ezekielos  is  less  bizarre  than  we  find  it  in  other 
authors.  Ezekielos'  figures  sink  into  insignificance 
beside  those  of  Lactantius,  who  tells  us  that  the 
bird's  monstrous  eyes  resembled  twin  hyacinths, 
from  the  midst  of  which  flashed  and  quivered  a 
bright  flame.  If  Ezekielos  really  refers  to  the 
phoenix,  how  does  it  come  into  the  drama  at  all? 
Gifford  has  this  note :  "  There  is  no  mention  in 
Exodus  of  the  phoenix  or  any  such  bird,  but  the 
twelve  palm-trees  (phoenix)  at  Elim  may  have  sug- 
gested the  story  of  the  phoenix  to  the  poet,  just  as 
in  the  poem  of  Lactantius.  Phoenix  70,  the  tree 
is  said  to  have  been  named  from  the  bird."  The 
word  phoenix  has,  I  may  add,  a  romantic  history. 
It  means,  literally,  Phoenician.  Now,  certain  of 
the  Phoenician  race  were  the  reputed  discoverers 
and  first  users  of  purple-red  or  crimson  dyes. 
Hence  these  colors  were  named  after  them, 
Phoenix  or  Phoenician.  The  Greek  translation,  in 
Isaiah  I.  18,  renders  "scarlet"  by  Phoenician. 
The  epithet  was  applied  equally  to  red  cattle,  to 
the  bay  horse,  to  the  date-palm  and  its  fruit.  It 
4  49 


BY-PATHS  IN  HEBRAIC  BOOKLAND 

was  also  used  of  the  fabulous  bird  because  of  its 
colorings.  Gifford  supposes,  then,  that  Ezekielos 
knowing  of  the  palms  reached  at  Elim  in  the  early 
wanderings  of  Israel,  introduced  the  bird  into  his 
drama.  The  palms  at  Elim  are  indeed  described 
by  this  very  word  (Phoenician)  in  the  Greek  trans- 
lation of  the  Bible  which  Ezekielos  used  (Exodus 
15.  27).  The  lulab  is  also  termed  phoenix  in  the 
Greek  of  Leviticus  23.  40. 

The  explanation  seems  at  first  sight  as  plausible 
as  it  is  clever.  But  it  involves  a  serious  difficulty. 
For  Ezekielos  in  a  previous  passage  has  already 
described  the  Phoenician  palm-trees  at  consider- 
able length.  The  passage  has  been  partly  noted 
above,  but  it  is  musical  enough  to  be  worth  citing 
as  a  whole : 

See,  my  Lord  Moses,  what  a  spot  is  found, 
Fanned  by  sweet  airs  from  yonder  shady  grov«; 
For  as  thyself  mayest  see,  there  lies  the  stream, 
And  thence  at  night  the  fiery  pillar  shed 
Its  welcome  guiding  light.     A  meadow  there 
Beside  the  stream  in  grateful  shadow  lies, 
And  a  deep  glen  in  rich  abundance  pours 
From  out  a  single  rock  twelve  sparkling  springs. 
There,  tall  and  strong,  and  laden  all  with  fruit, 
Stand  palms  threescore  and  ten ;  and  plenteous  grass, 
Well  watered,  gives  sweet  pasture  to  our  flocks. 

50 


THE  PHOENIX  OF  EZEKIELOS 

It  seems  incredible  that  the  poet  who  thus  de- 
scribes the  palms  could  then  have  proceeded  to  con- 
fuse the  palms  with  a  bird.  Ezekielos  does  not  use 
the  epithet  Phoenician  in  his  account  of  the  latter. 
Thus  the  theory  breaks  down.  How  then  is  the 
passage  to  be  explained?  As  it  seems  to  me,  in 
another  and  simpler  way. 

"  There  is  no  mention  in  Exodus  of  the  phoenix 
or  any  such  bird,"  says  Gifford.  He  is  right  as  to 
the  phoenix,  but  is  he  right  as  to  "  any  such  bird  "? 
My  readers  will  at  once  remember  the  forceful 
metaphor  in  the  nineteenth  chapter  of  Exodus: 
"  And  Moses  went  up  unto  God,  and  the  Lord 
called  unto  him  out  of  the  mountain,  saying :  '  Thus 
shalt  thou  say  to  the  house  of  Jacob,  and  tell  the 
children  of  Israel:  Ye  have  seen  what  I  did  unto 
the  Egyptians,  and  how  I  bore  you  on  eagles'  wings, 
and  brought  you  unto  Myself.' '  The  Mekilta  in- 
terprets the  words  to  refer  to  the  rapidity  with 
which  Israel  was  assembled  for  the  departure  from 
Egypt,  and  to  the  powerful  protection  which  it 
afterwards  enjoyed.  But  we  may  also  find  in  the 
same  words  the  clue  to  the  poet's  fancy.  "  I  bore 
you  on  eagles'  wings,"  says  the  Pentateuch.  No 
doubt  the  phrases  of  Herodotus,  as  well  as  those  of 
Hesiod,  were  familiar  to  Ezekielos.  With  these 

51 


BY-PATHS  IN  HEBRAIC  BOOKLAND 

in  mind,  he  introduced  a  super-eagle,  figuratively 
mentioned  in  the  book  of  Exodus,  and  gave  to  it 
substance  and  life.  He  personified  the  metaphor. 
It  would  be  a  perfectly  legitimate  exercise  of  poet- 
ical license.  The  description  is  bizarre.  But  it  is 
not  mythological,  and  it  has  little  to  do  with  the 
phoenix  of  fable. 


52 


THE  LETTER  OF  SHERIRA 

Though  all  Israelites  are  brothers,  they  do  not 
admit  that  they  are  all  members  of  the  same  family. 
"  Of  good  genealogy  "  is  the  proudest  boast  of  the 
modern,  as  it  was  of  the  talmudic,  Jew.  It  is,  ac- 
cordingly, not  wonderful  that  we  find  our  notabili- 
ties from  Hillel  to  Abarbanel  claiming,  or  having 
assigned  to  them,  descent  from  the  Davidic  line. 
Of  Sherira  the  same  was  said.  He  ruled  over  the 
academy  in  Pumbeditha  during  the  last  third  of 
the  tenth  century.  A  scion  of  the  royal  house  of 
Judah,  he  was  rightful  heir  to  the  exilarchy,  yet 
preferred  the  socially  lower,  but  academically 
higher,  office  of  Gaon.  The  Gaon's  sway  was 
religious  and  scholastic;  the  exilarch's  secular  and 
political.  Sherira's  ancestry  might  have  given  him 
the  latter  post,  but  for  the  former  it  was  intrinsic, 
personal  worth  which  qualified  him  and  his  famous 
son  Hai.  Who  shall  deny  that  he  made  a  worthy 
choice  ? 

Sherira's  fame  rests  less  on  his  general  activities 
as  Gaon  than  on  the  Letter  which  he  wrote  about 

53 


BY-PATHS  IN  HEBRAIC  BOOKLAND 

the  year  980,  in  response  to  questions  formulated 
by  Jacob  ben  Nissim,  of  Kairuwan.  One  of  these 
questions  retains,  and  will  ever  retain,  its  fascina- 
tion, although  the  answer  has  now  no  vital  interest. 
Historically  the  Letter  has  other  claims  to  con- 
tinued study.  To  quote  Dr.  L.  Ginzberg  ( Geonica, 
i,  p.  169)  :  "  The  lasting  value  of  his  epistle  for  us 
lies  in  the  information  Rabbi  Sherira  gives  about 
the  post-Talmudic  scholars.  On  this  period  he  is 
practically  the  only  source  we  have."  Without 
Sherira,  the  course  of  the  traditional  development 
would  be  a  blank  for  a  long  interval  after  the  close 
of  the  Talmud.  "  But,"  continues  Dr.  Ginzberg, 
"  we  shall  be  doing  Rabbi  Sherira  injustice  if  we 
thought  of  him  merely  as  a  chronologist."  And 
this  same  competent  scholar  launches  out  into  the 
following  eulogy  of  the  Gaon:  "The  theories 
which  he  unfolds  ....  regarding  the  origin  of 
the  Mishnah  ....  and  many  other  points  impor- 
tant in  the  history  of  the  Talmud  and  its  problems, 
stamp  Rabbi  Sherira  as  one  of  the  most  distin- 
guished historians,  in  fact,  it  is  not  an  exaggeration 
to  say,  the  most  distinguished  historian  of  litera- 
ture among  the  Jews,  not  only  of  antiquity,  but  also 
in  the  middle  ages,  and  during  a  large  part  of  mod- 
ern times." 

54 


THE  LETTER  OF  SHERIRA 

This  must  suffice  for  the  general  estimate  of 
Sherira's  work.  What  is  of  more  striking  interest 
is  just  the  one  question,  the  answer  to  which  does 
not  much  matter.  As  Dr.  Neubauer  formulated 
the  question  put  to  Sherira,  it  ran  thus :  "  Was  the 
Mishnah  transmitted  orally  to  the  doctors  of  the 
Mishnah,  or  was  it  written  down  by  the  compiler 
himself?  "  Judah  the  Prince,  we  know,  compiled 
the  Mishnah,  but  did  he  leave  it  in  an  oral  or  a 
documentary  form?  Was  it  memorized  or  set 
down  in  script?  The  answer  does  not  much  mat- 
ter, as  I  have  said,  for  sooner  or  later  the  Mishnah 
was  written  out,  and  it  is  not  of  great  consequence 
whether  it  was  later  or  sooner.  And  it  is  as  well 
that  Sherira's  answer  matters  little,  for  we  do  not 
know  for  certain  what  Sherira's  answer  was  !  Most 
authorities  nowadays  believe  that  the  Gaon  pro- 
nounced in  favor  of  the  written  compilation;  but 
this  was  not  always  the  case.  For  Sherira's  Letter 
was  current  in  two  versions  which  recorded  oppo- 
site opinions.  In  the  French  form  the  oral  alter- 
native was  accepted,  but  the  Spanish  text  adopted 
the  written  theory.  Which  was  the  genuine  view 
of  Sherira?  There  are  many  reasons  for  prefer- 
ring the  Spanish  version.  As  Dr.  Neubauer  points 
out,  "  books,  letters,  and  responsa  coming  from  the 

55 


BY-PATHS  IN  HEBRAIC  BOOKLAND 

East,  reached  Spain  and  Italy  before  they  came  to 
France  and  Germany."  Hence  the  Spanish  text  is 
more  likely  to  be  primitive ;  while,  when  the  Letter 
was  carried  further,  it  might  easily  have  been  altered 
so  as  to  fall  in  with  the  talmudic  prohibition  against 
putting  the  traditional  laws  into  writing.  It  will, 
again,  come  as  a  surprise  to  some  to  note  another 
argument  used  by  Dr.  Neubauer  in  favor  of  the 
Spanish  text.  "  From  the  greater  consistency  of 
the  Aramaic  dialect  in  the  Spanish  text,  a  dialect 
which,  as  we  know  from  the  Responsa  of  the 
Geonim,  they  used  in  their  writings,  it  may  be  con- 
cluded that  this  (the  Spanish)  composition  is  the 
genuine  one."  The  Gaonate  was  able  to  maintain 
a  pretty  thorough  Jewish  spirit  without  insisting 
on  the  use  of  Hebrew  as  the  only  medium  of  salva- 
tion. Actually  Dr.  Neubauer  saw  in  the  more  con- 
sistent Aramaic  of  the  Spanish  text  an  indication 
of  its  superior  authenticity  over  what  may  be  called 
the  French  text ! 

But  all  these  points  are  secondary.  The  real  in- 
terest lies  in  this  whole  conception  of  an  oral  book. 
Tradition  necessarily  must  be  largely  oral;  ideas, 
maxims,  and  even  defined  rules  of  conduct  not  only 
can  be,  they  must  be,  transmitted  by  word  of 
mouth.  But  is  there  any  possibility  that  a  whole, 

56 


THE  LETTER  OF  SHERIRA 

elaborate  book,  or  rather  series  of  six  books,  should 
be  put  together  and  then  trusted  to  memory?  A 
new  turn  to  the  discussion  was  given  by  Prof.  Gil- 
bert Murray's  Harvard  Lectures  on  "  The  Rise  of 
the  Greek  Epic."  To  him  the  Iliad  of  Homer  ap- 
pears in  the  guise  of  a  "  traditional  book."  No 
doubt  the  Mishnah  belongs  to  a  period  separated 
from  Homer  by  well-nigh  a  millennium.  But  the 
phrase  holds.  A  book  can  be  the  outcome  of  tra- 
dition, can  be  carried  on  by  it,  expanded  and  elabo- 
rated, just  as  much  as  an  oral  code  or  history  or 
poem.  When,  then,  we  speak  of  a  traditional 
book,  it  does  not  necessarily  mean  that  the  book 
was  not  written  down.  The  written  words  become 
precious,  and  the  fact  that  they  are  written  does  not 
of  itself  spell  finality  or  stagnation.  There  never 
was  any  danger  of  such  an  evil  result  until  the  age 
of  printing  and  stereotyping.  Nor  can  we  conceive 
of  a  traditional  book  as  the  work  of  one  mind. 
Judah  the  Prince  neither  began  nor  ended  the  chain 
of  tradition  because  he  wrote  the  Mishnah.  There 
had  been  Mishnahs  before  him,  just  as  there  were 
developments  of  law  after  him. 

Yet,  on  the  other  hand,  it  is  not  incredible  that 
Judah  the  Prince's  traditional  book  remained  an 
unwritten  book.  It  is  improbable,  but  not  at  all 

57 


BY-PATHS  IN  HEBRAIC  BOOKLAND 

impossible.  A  modern  lawyer  of  the  first  rank 
must  hold  in  his  mind  quite  as  many  decisions  and 
principles  as  are  contained  in  the  Mishnah. 
Macaulay  could  repeat  by  heart  the  whole  of  the 
Paradise  Lost  and  much  else.  Many  a  Talmudist 
of  the  present  day  must  remember  vast  masses  of 
the  traditional  Halakah.  Before  the  age  of  print- 
ing, before  copies  of  books  became  common  and 
easily  accessible,  scholars  must  have  been  compelled 
to  trust  to  their  memory  for  many  things  for  which 
we  can  turn  to  our  reference  libraries.  When 
Maimonides  compiled  his  great  Code,  he  must  have 
done  a  good  deal  of  it  from  memory.  Not  that 
men's  memories  are  worse  now  than  they  were. 
But  we  are  now  able  to  spare  ourselves.  It  is  not 
a  good  thing  to  use  the  memory  unnecessarily.  It 
should  be  reserved  for  essentials.  What  we  can 
always  get  from  books  we  need  not  keep  in  mind. 
Besides,  in  olden  times  men  remembered  better  not 
because  they  had  better  memories,  but  because  they 
had  less  to  remember. 

On  the  whole,  however,  it  is  safer  to  conclude 
that  Judah  the  Prince  made  a  contribution  to  writ- 
ten literature,  that  he  set  down  at  a  particular 
moment  (about  200  C.  E.)  the  traditional  book 
which  had  been  writing  itself  for  many  decades, 

58 


THE  LETTER  OF  SHERIRA 

partly  by  the  minds  of  the  Rabbis,  partly  by  their 
pens.  He  started  the  book  on  a  new  career  of 
humane  activity.  Sherira  and  the  Geonim  were 
what  they  were  because  Judah  the  Prince  was  what 
he  was.  This  is  the  essential  fact  about  tradition. 
The  more  we  give  of  our  best  to  our  age,  the  more 
chance  is  there  for  all  future  ages  to  transmit  of 
their  best  to  posterity. 


59 


NATHAN  OF  ROME'S  DICTIONARY 

A  dictionary  may  seem  an  intruder  in  this  gal- 
lery. The  present  scries  of  cursory  studies  clearly 
is  not  concerned  with  works  of  technical  scholar- 
ship. But  the  dictionary  by  Nathan,  son  of  Jehiel, 
earns  inclusion  for  two  reasons.  First,  because 
when  one  surveys  the  expressions  of  the  Jewish 
spirit,  it  is  impossible  to  draw  a  line  between  learn- 
ing and  literature.  Secondly,  quite  apart  from  this 
intimate  general  connection  between  the  scholar  and 
the  man  of  letters,  the  dictionary  of  Nathan  be- 
longs specially  to  the  course  of  culture.  Among 
the  Christian  Humanists  who,  at  the  period  of  the 
Reformation,  promoted  the  enlightenment  of 
Europe,  were  not  lacking  appreciators  of  the  ser- 
vices rendered  to  enlightenment  by  Nathan's  Aruk 
(to  give  it  its  Hebrew  title). 

Nathan  (born  about  1035  and  died  in  1106) 
was  an  itinerant  vendor  of  linen  wares  in  his  youth. 
He  belonged  to  the  family  Degli  Mansi,  an  Italian 
rendering  of  the  Hebrew  Anaw  or  Meek.  The 
latter  is  still  a  rare  but  familiar  Jewish  surname. 
Legend  has  it  that  the  founder  of  the  Degli  Mansi 

60 


NATHAN  OF  ROME'S  DICTIONARY 

house  was  one  of  the  original  settlers  introduced 
into  Rome  by  Titus.  At  all  events,  the  family 
had  a  long  record  of  literary  fame.  Like  many 
another  merchant-traveller  of  the  Middle  Ages, 
Nathan  made  use  of  his  earlier  wanderings  (as  he 
did  of  his  later  journeys),  to  sit  at  the  feet  of  all 
the  Gamaliels  of  his  age.  Many  and  various  were 
his  teachers.  He  abandoned  business  when  he  re- 
turned to  Rome  after  his  father's  death.  He  tells 
us  how  he  made  the  arrangements  for  the  inter- 
ment, and  here  straightway  we  perceive  that  his 
Aruk  is  no  ordinary  dictionary.  For  in  the  poem, 
which  he  appends  as  a  kind  of  retrospective  pref- 
ace, he  records  how  sternly  he  had  ever  disap- 
proved of  the  expenses  incurred  at  Jewish  funerals 
in  his  time.  Protests  were  vain,  but  example  was 
more  fruitful.  In  place  of  the  double  cerements  in 
common  use,  he  laid  his  father  in  his  tomb  with  a 
single  shroud.  This,  he  records,  became  the  model 
for  others  to  imitate.  Death  was  a  frequent  visitor 
in  his  abode.  Of  his  four  sons,  none  survived  the 
eighth  year,  one  not  even  his  eighth  day.  Grief 
did  not  crush  him.  "  I  found  sorrow  and  trouble, 
then  I  called  on  the  name  of  the  Lord,"  he  quotes. 
He  proceeded  to  erect  a  house  of  another  kind. 
Not  of  flesh  and  blood,  but  vital  with  the  spirit  of 

61 


BY-PATHS  IN  HEBRAIC  BOOKLAND 

Judaism,  his  Aruk  is  a  monument  more  lasting  than 
ten  children. 

In  what,  then,  does  the  importance  of  the  dic- 
tionary consist?  It  is,  of  course,  primarily,  what 
Graetz  terms  it,  "  a  key  to  the  Talmud."  No 
doubt  there  were  earlier  compilations  of  a  similar 
nature,  but  Nathan's  book  was  the  most  renowned 
of  its  own  age,  and  became  the  basis  of  every  sub- 
sequent lexicon  to  the  Talmud.  Gentile  and  Jew, 
from  Buxtorf  to  Dalman  and  from  Musafia  to 
Jastrow,  employed  it  as  the  ground-work  of  their 
own  lexicographical  research.  Moreover,  it  was 
again  and  again  edited  and  enlarged;  but  we  are 
not  dealing  here  with  bibliographical  details.  Suf- 
fice it  to  mention  the  final  edition  by  Alexander 
Kohut.  Kohut  began  his  Aruch  Completum  while 
a  European  Rabbi  in  1878,  and  finished  it  in  New 
York  in  1892.  It  is  remarkable  that  two  of  the 
best  modern  lexicons  to  the  Talmud  (Kohut's  in 
Hebrew  and  Jastrow's  in  English)  both  emanate 
from  America. 

Besides  its  value  for  understanding  the  text  of 
the  Talmud,  Nathan's  Aruk  has  earned  other  claims 
to  fame.  Nathan's  dictionary  marks  an  epoch,  says 
Vogelstein.  Consider  the  situation.  The  centre 
of  Jewish  authority  was  leaving  Babylon.  The  last 

62 


NATHAN  OF  ROME'S  DICTIONARY 

of  the  great  literary  Geonim — or  Excellencies,  as 
the  heads  of  the  Babylonian  schools  were  called — 
died  in  the  year  1038.  Europe  was  replacing  Asia 
as  the  scene  of  Jewish  life.  Was  the  old  tradition  to 
die  ?  At  the  very  moment  of  the  crisis,  three  men 
arose  to  prevent  the  chain  snapping.  They  were 
almost  contemporaries,  and  their  works  supple- 
mented each  other.  There  was  the  Frenchman 
Rashi — the  commentator;  the  Spaniard  al-Fasi — 
the  codifier;  and  the  Italian  Nathan — the  lexi- 
cographer. Between  them  they  re-established  in 
Europe  the  tradition  of  the  Gaonate.  The  Baby- 
lonian schools  might  come  and  go;  they  might  for  a 
time  enjoy  hegemony,  and  then  fall  into  decay;  but 
the  Torah  must  go  on  forever ! 

The  manner  in  which  this  dictionary  carried  on 
the  tradition  is  easily  told.  Much  of  the  lore  it 
contains,  explanations  of  words  and  of  things,  must 
have  been  orally  acquired  in  direct  conversations 
with  those  who  were  personally  linked  with  the 
older  regime.  It  is  again  full  of  quotations  of  the 
decisions  and  customary  lore  of  the  Babylonian 
schools.  If  on  this  side  the  Aruk  has  almost  played 
out  its  part  for  us,  it  is  not  because  those  decisions 
and  customs  are  less  interesting  to  us  than  they  were 
to  our  fathers.  But  we  are  now  in  possession  of  very 

68 


BY-PATHS  IN  HEBRAIC  BOOKLAND 

many  of  the  gaonic  writings  in  their  original.  We 
have  recovered  several  of  the  sources  from  which 
Nathan  drew.  The  Egyptian  Genizah — that  won- 
derfully preserved  mass  of  the  relics  of  Hebrew 
literature — has  yielded  its  richest  harvest  just  in 
this  field.  We  are  getting  to  know  more  about  the 
thought  and  manner  of  life  of  the  eighth  to  the 
eleventh  centuries  than  we  know  about  our  own 
time.  But  for  a  long  interval  men's  knowledge  of 
those  centuries  was  largely  derived  from  the  Aruk. 
As  a  source  of  information  it  is  not  even  now  super- 
seded. There  still  remain  authors  whose  names 
and  works  would  be  lost  but  for  Rabbi  Nathan's 
quotations. 

Another  aspect  of  the  book  which  makes  it  so 
valuable  for  the  history  of  culture  among  the  Jews 
is  the  number  of  languages  which  Nathan  uses. 
What  an  array  it  is!  Kohut  enumerates  (besides 
Hebrew  and  Aramaic)  Latin,  Greek,  Arabic, 
Slavonic  dialects,  Persian,  and  Italian  and  allied 
speeches.  Nathan  cannot  have  known  all  these 
languages  well.  He  certainly  had  little  Latin  and 
less  Greek,  but  he  repeated  what  he  had  heard 
from  others  or  read  in  their  books.  It  is  remark- 
able, indeed,  how  well  the  sense  of  Greek  words 
was  transmitted  by  Jewish  writers  who  were  igno- 

64 


NATHAN  OF  ROME'S  DICTIONARY 

rant  of  Greek.  They  often  are  not  even  aware  that 
the  words  are  Greek  at  all;  they  suggest  the  most 
impossible  Semitic  derivations;  but  they  very  rarely 
give  the  meanings  incorrectly.  This  applies  less 
to  the  Italian  than  to  the  German  Jewish  scholars. 
I  mean  that  the  former  had,  on  the  whole,  a  more 
intimate  acquaintance  with  the  classical  idioms.  In 
the  case  of  Nathan's  Aruk  the  languages  cited  do 
imply  a  wide  and  varied  culture.  Most  interesting 
is  Nathan's  free  use  of  Italian.  Just  as  we  learn 
from  the  glosses  in  Rashi's  commentaries  that  the 
Jews  of  northern  France  spoke  French,  so  we 
gather  from  Nathan's  dictionary  that  the  Jews  of 
Rome  must  have  used  Italian  as  the  medium  of 
ordinary  intercourse. 

Nathan's  Aruk,  while,  as  we  have  seen,  it  was 
a  link  between  the  past  and  his  present,  was  also 
part  of  the  chain  binding  his  present  to  the  future. 
Nathan  records  the  tradition  as  he  received  it,  but 
he  also  points  forward.  Take  one  of  his  remarks, 
which  is  quoted  by  Giidemann.  There  is  much  in 
the  Talmud  on  the  subject  of  magic,  and  Nathan 
duly  explains  the  terms  employed.  But  he  says: 
"  All  these  statements  about  magic  and  amulets, 
I  know  neither  their  meaning  nor  their  origin." 
Does  the  reader  appreciate  the  extraordinary  sig- 
<  65 


BY-PATHS  IN  HEBRAIC  BOOKLAND 

nificance  of  the  statement?  Nathan,  the  bearer  of 
tradition,  yet  sees  that  the  newer  order  of  things 
also  has  its  claims.  Tradition  does  not  consist  in 
the  denial  of  science.  And  so,  though  a  Gaon  like 
Hai  had  a  pretty  considerable  belief  in  demon- 
ology,  Nathan  cautiously  expresses  his  scepticism. 
Even  more  emphatically,  a  little  later,  Ibn  Ezra 
frankly  asserted  that  he  had  no  belief  in  demons. 
It  may  be  questioned  whether  this  enfranchisement 
from  demonological  conceptions  could  be  matched 
in  non-Jewish  thought  of  so  early  a  date.  The 
Aruk  assuredly  points  forwards  as  well  as  back- 
wards. 

And  all  this  we  derive  from  a  dictionary !  The 
Aruk  obviously  belongs  to  culture  as  well  as  to 
philology — if  the  two  things  really  can  be  sepa- 
rated. The  study  of  words  is  often  the  study  of 
civilization.  Max  Miiller  maintained  that  if  you 
could  only  tell  the  real  history  of  words  you  would 
thereby  be  telling  the  real  history  of  men.  He 
carried  the  idea  absurdly  far;  but  Nathan's  Aruk 
is  a  striking  instance  of  at  least  the  partial  truth  of 
the  great  Sanskrit  scholar's  contention. 


THE  SORROWS  OF  TATNU 

Tatnu  has  a  weird  sound.  But  it  is  not  the  title 
of  a  fetich ;  it  is  not  a  personal  name ;  it  is  not  even 
a  word  at  all.  It  is,  indeed,  a  figure;  but  the  figure 
it  stands  for  is  numerical.  The  letters  which  com- 
pose the  Hebrew  combination  Tatnu  amount  to  856 
(taw  =  400;  f*ra>  =  4OO;  nun  =  $o;  waw  =  6) . 
It  represents  a  date.  To  transpose  it  from  the  era 
anno  mundi  to  the  current  era,  it  is  necessary  to 
add  240.  This  brings  us  to  1096,  the  year  of  the 
First  Crusade. 

If  Tatnu  is  no  person,  neither  do  its  sorrows 
form  a  book.  They  constitute  rather  a  library  of 
narratives,  small  in  size  but  great  in  substance. 
They  are  hardly  literary,  yet  they  belong  to  the 
masterpieces  of  literature.  Their  story  is  recorded 
with  few  ornaments  of  style,  but  their  simple, 
poignant  directness  is  more  effective  than  rhetoric. 
Martyrdom  needs  no  tricks  of  the  word-artist;  it 
tells  its  own  tale. 

The  Historical  Commission  for  the  History  of 
the  Jews  in  Germany  had  but  a  brief  career,  though 
it  has  revived  under  the  newer  title  of  the  Gesamt- 

67 


BY-PATHS  IN  HEBRAIC  BOOKLAND 

archiv.  The  Commission  aimed  at  two  ends:  to 
introduce  to  Jewish  notice  information  about  the 
Jews  scattered  in  Christian  sources,  and  to  make 
accessible  to  Christians  facts  about  themselves  con- 
tained in  Jewish  authorities.  From  1887  to  1898, 
the  Commission  was  actively  at  work,  and  among 
the  books  it  published  were  two  valuable  volumes 
dealing  with  the  martyrologies  of  the  Jews.  For 
the  first  time,  these  narratives  were  adequately 
edited.  The  pathetic  records  of  sufferings  endured 
in  the  Rhine-lands  and  elsewhere  stand,  for  all 
time,  ready  to  the  hand  of  the  historian. 

The  first  moral  to  be  extracted  from  these  rec- 
ords is  the  certainty  that  war  is  an  evil.  No  one 
can  dispute  the  noble  motives  of  the  crusaders.  The 
unquenchable  enthusiasm  which  led  high  and  low 
to  forsake  their  homes  and  engage  in  eastern  ad- 
ventures, the  unflinching  courage  with  which  the 
dangers  of  battle  and  the  hardships  and  privations 
of  wearisome  campaigns  were  borne,  the  trans- 
parent singleness  of  purpose  which  animated  many 
a  soldier  of  the  cross — all  these  factors  tend  to 
cover  the  sordid  truth  with  a  glamor  of  idealism 
and  chivalry.  But  the  wars  of  the  Crusades  were 
tainted  with  savagery,  and  if  so  what  wars  can  be 
clean?  The  barbarities  inflicted  in  Europe  on  the 

68 


THE  SORROWS  OF  TATNU 

Jews  color  with  a  red  and  gruesome  haze  the  hero- 
isms performed  against  Mohammedans  in  Asia. 
War,  it  is  said,  brings  to  the  fore  some  of  the  finest 
qualities  of  human  nature.  Exactly,  but  the  war  of 
man  against  nature  calls  for  the  exercise  of  the 
same  qualities.  The  heroism  of  the  coal-mine  is 
as  great  from  every  point  of  view  as  the  heroism 
of  the  battlefield*  And  the  battlefield  from  first 
to  last  is  the  scene  of  human  nature  at  its  lowest  as 
well  as  at  its  highest.  Nor  is  the  battlefield  the 
whole  of  war.  Those  who  persuade  themselves 
that  war,  though  an  evil,  is  not  an  unmixed  evil, 
will  find  in  the  Sorrows  of  Tatnu  and  allied  books 
a  rather  useful  corrective  to  their  complacency. 

When  in  1913  I  re-read  Neubauer  and  Stern's 
volume  (1892)  and  Dr.  Salfeld's  magnificent  edi- 
tion of  the  Nuremberg  Martyrology  (1898) — it 
was  not  long  before  the  outbreak  of  the  European 
war — I  was  so  moved  that  I  sent  a  donation  to  the 
Peace  Society.  Quite  a  nice  thing  to  do,  some  will 
urge,  but  is  it  worth  while,  for  such  an  end,  to  rake 
up  these  miserable  tales?  The  whole  of  this  class 
of  literature  was  long  neglected  because  of  a  similar 
feeling.  Stobbe,  who  rendered  such  conspicuous 
service  to  the  Jewish  cause,  was  actuated  by  the 
identical  sentiment,  when  he  wrote  that  it  would  be 

69 


BY-PATHS  IN  HEBRAIC  BOOKLAND 

"  a  grim  and  a  thankless  task  "  to  enter  fully  into 
the  sufferings  of  the  Jews  in  the  medieval  period. 
But  the  Commission  above  referred  to  took  another 
view ;  it  printed  the  texts  and  circulated  them  in  the 
completest  detail.  Now  it  depends  entirely  on  the 
purpose  with  which  such  remorseless  crimes  are  as 
remorselessly  dragged  to  the  light  of  day.  If  the 
desire  is  to  revive  bitterness,  then  it  is  a  foul  desire 
which  ought  to  be  crushed.  And  not  only  if  this 
be  the  desire,  if  it  prove  to  be  the  consequence,  if 
as  a  result  of  such  re-publication  animosity  is  re- 
kindled, then  the  re-publication  is  to  be  condemned. 
But  in  the  case  of  the  Sorrows  of  Tatnu,  neither 
the  motive  nor  the  consequence  is  of  this  character. 
Salfeld  gave  us  his  edition  of  these  monuments  of 
the  Jewish  tribulations,  "  den  Toten  zur  Ehre,  den 
Lebenden  zur  Lehre";  to  honor  the  dead,  to  in- 
spire the  living.  Neither  he  nor  any  other  Jewish 
writer  wishes  to  play  the  part  of  Virgil's  Misenus, 
who  was  skilled  in  "  setting  Mars  alight  with  his 
song"  (Martem  accendere  cantu) .  The  heroism 
of  the  sufferers,  not  the  brutality  of  the  aggressors, 
is  the  theme  of  the  Jewish  historian  who  deals  with 
the  Sorrows  of  Tatnu  and  of  many  another  year; 
not  the  lurid  glow  of  the  bloodshed,  but  the  white 
light  of  the  martyrdom;  not  the  pain,  but  the  tri- 

70 


THE  SORROWS  OF  TATNU 

umph  over  it;  not  the  infliction,  but  the  endurance 
unto  and  beyond  death.  These  aspects  of  the  story 
ought,  indeed,  to  be  told  and  retold  "  to  honor  the 
dead,  to  inspire  the  living." 

Closely  connected  with  this  thought  is  another. 
The  Commission,  be  it  remembered,  was  a  Jewish 
body,  appointed  by  the  Deutsch-Israelitische 
Gemeindebund  in  1885.  But  Graetz  was  not  ap- 
pointed a  member.  (Comp.  the  Memoir  in  the 
Index  Volume  of  Graetz's  History  of  the  Jews, 
Philadelphia,  1898,  p.  78).  Why  did  the  leaders 
of  Berlin  Jewry  ignore  Graetz,  the  man  who,  above 
all  others,  had  stirred  the  conscience  of  Europe  by 
his  vivid  pictures  of  the  medieval  persecution  so 
poignantly  illustrated  in  the  Sorrows  of  Tatnu? 
That  was  the  very  ground  for  excluding  Graetz. 
There  is  no  doubt  but  that  Graetz's  method  of 
writing  Jewish  history  was  somewhat  roughly 
handled  at  about  the  period  named.  This  assault 
came  from  two  sides.  Treitschke,  the  German  and 
Christian,  attacked  Graetz  as  anti-Christian  and 
anti-German,  and  used  citations  from  Graetz  to 
support  his  propaganda  of  academic  anti-Semitism. 
Certain  Jews,  on  the  other  hand,  felt  that,  though 
Treitschke  was  wrong,  Graetz  was  too  inclined  to 
regard  the  world's  history  from  a  partisan  and 

71 


BY-PATHS  IN  HEBRAIC  BOOKLAND 

sectarian  point  of  view.  Whether  or  not  this  was 
the  reason  for  the  exclusion  of  Graetz  from  the 
Commission,  what  is  interesting  to  note  is  the  fact 
that  the  Commission,  when  it  came  to  grips  with 
the  records,  produced  quite  as  emphatic  an  exposure 
of  the  medieval  persecution  as  Graetz  himself.  It 
is,  in  brief,  impossible  for  any  student  of  the  rec- 
ords to  do  otherwise. 

The  Commission  included  among  its  members 
some  (conspicuously  L.  Geiger)  who  subsequently 
proved  to  be  the  strongest  anti-Zionists.  The  duty 
and  the  desire  to  honor  the  dead  for  the  inspiration 
of  the  living  are  not  restricted  to  any  one  section 
of  our  community.  There  is  nothing  nationalistic 
or  anti-nationalistic  in  our  common  sympathy  with 
the  Sorrows  of  Tatnu,  in  our  common  impulse  to 
turn  those  sorrows  to  vital  account  in  the  present. 
In  a  soft  age  it  is  well  to  be  reminded  that  Judaism 
is  above  all  synonymous  with  hardihood.  Thus 
these  memories  are  cherished  because  "  the  blood 
of  the  martyr  is  the  seed  of  the  church."  This 
magnificent  thought  originated  with  Tertullian, 
though  the  precise  phrase  is  not  his.  The  idea  con- 
veyed by  these  oft-quoted  words  must  be  carefully 
weighed,  lest  we  make  of  it  a  half-truth  instead  of  a 
truth.  No  institution  is  founded  on  its  dead,  it  is 

72 


THE  SORROWS  OF  TATNU 

its  living  upholders  who  alone  can  support  it.  We 
tell  these  stories  of  the  dead,  because,  in  their  day, 
they,  living,  recognized  that  to  save  themselves  men 
must  sometimes  sacrifice  themselves.  To  pay,  as 
the  price  of  life,  the  very  thing  that  makes  life 
worth  living  is  an  ignoble  and  futile  bargain.  The 
Sorrows  of  Tatnu,  regarded  as  the  expression  of 
this  conviction,  are  converted  from  an  elegy  into  a 
papan.  But  the  song  is  discordant  unless  we,  who 
sing  it,  are  also  prepared  to  act  it,  in  our  own  way 
and  in  our  own  different  circumstances.  Den  Toten 
zur  Ehre,  den  Lebenden  zur  Lehre. 


PART  II 


PART  II 

IBN  GEBIROL'S  "  ROYAL  CROWN  " 

Authors  are  not  invariably  the  best  critics  of  their 
own  work.  Was  Solomon  Ibn  Gebirol,  who  was 
born  in  Andalusia,  perhaps  in  Malaga,  in  the 
earlier  part  of  the  eleventh  century,  just  when  he 
regarded  as  the  crown  of  all  his  writings  the  long 
poem  which  he  called  the  "  Royal  Crown  "  (Kcter 
Malkut)  ?  Some  will  always  doubt  his  judgment. 
Plausibly  enough,  preference  may  be  felt  for  sev- 
eral of  his  shorter  poems,  particularly  "  At  Dawn  I 
Seek  Thee  "  (which  Mrs.  R.  N.  Salaman  trans- 
lated for  the  Routledge  Mahzor)  or  "  Happy  the 
Eye  that  Saw  these  Things  "  (paraphrased  by 
Mrs.  Lucas  in  her  Jewish  Year) . 

Ibn  Gebirol  was,  however,  sound  in  his  opinion. 
One  line  in  the  "  Royal  Crown  "  is  the  finest  that 
he,  or  any  other  neo-Hebraic  poet,  ever  wrote. 
Should  God  make  visitation  as  to  iniquity,  cries 
Ibn  Gebirol,  then  "  from  Thee  I  will  flee  to  Thee." 
Nieto  interpreted :  "  I  will  fly  from  Thy  justice  to 
Thy  clemency."  But  the  line  needs  no  interpre- 
tation. In  his  Confessions  (4.  9)  Augustine  says: 

77 


BY-PATHS  IN  HEBRAIC  BOOKLAND 

"  Thee  no  man  loses,  but  he  that  lets  Thee  go. 
And  he  that  lets  Thee  go,  whither  goes  he,  or 
whither  runs  he,  but  from  Thee  well  pleased  back 
to  Thee  offended  ?  "  A  great  passage,  but  Ibn 
Gebirol's  is  greater.  It  is  a  sublime  thought,  and 
its  author  was  inspired.  He  must  have  felt  this 
when  he  named  his  poem.  For  the  title  comes  from 
the  Book  of  Esther,  and  the  Midrash  has  it  that, 
when  the  queen  is  described  as  donning  the  robes 
of  royalty,  the  Scripture  means  to  tell  us  that  the 
holy  spirit  rested  on  her. 

It  has  been  said  (among  others,  by  Sachs  and 
Steinschneider)  that  the  "  Royal  Crown  "  is  sub- 
stantially a  versification  of  Aristotle's  short  treatise 
"  On  the  World."  This  is  in  a  sense  true  enough. 
The  "  Royal  Crown  "  is  largely  physical,  and  to 
modern  readers  is  marred  by  its  long  paragraphs 
of  obsolete  astronomical  conceptions,  which  go 
back,  through  the  Ptolemaic  system,  to  Aristotle. 
Moreover,  Aristotle,  in  his  treatise  cited  above, 
anticipated  Ibn  Gebirol  in  the  motive  with  which 
he  directed  his  ancient  readers'  attention  to  the 
elements  and  the  planets.  "  What  the  pilot  is  in  a 
ship,  the  driver  in  a  chariot,  the  coryphaeus  in  a 
choir,  the  general  in  an  army,  the  lawgiver  in  a 
city — that  is  God  in  the  world  "  (De  Mundo,  6). 

78 


IBN  GEBIROL'S  "  ROYAL  CROWN  " 

This  saying  of  Aristotle  is  indeed  Ibn  Gebirol's 
text.  But  the  Hebrew  poet  owes  nothing  else  than 
the  skeleton  to  his  Greek  exemplar.  The  style — 
with  its  superb  application  of  biblical  phrases,  a 
method  which  in  al-Harizi  is  used  to  raise  a  laugh, 
but  in  Ibn  Gebirol  at  every  turn  rouses  reverence — 
is  as  un-Greek  as  are  the  spiritual  intensity  of 
thought  and  the  moral  optimism  of  outlook. 

Our  Sephardic  brethren  were  wiser  than  the 
Ashkenazim  in  their  selections  for  the  liturgy. 
Why  the  Ashkenazim  have  neglected  Ibn  Gebirol 
and  ha-Levi  in  favor  of  Kalir  will  always  remain  a 
mystery.  The  Sephardim  did  not  include  all  that 
they  might  have  done  from  the  Spanish  poets,  but 
the  Ashkenazic  Mahzor  has  suffered  by  the  loss  of 
such  masterpieces  as  Judah  ha-Levi's  "  Lord !  unto 
Thee  are  ever  manifest  my  inmost  heart's  de- 
sires, though  unexpressed  in  spoken  words."  But 
most  of  all  is  our  loss  apparent  in  the  omission  of 
the  "  Royal  Crown  "  from  the  Kol  Nidre  service. 
In  Germany,  the  Ashkenazim  have  been  better  ad- 
vised. The  Rodelheim  Mahzor  and  the  Michael 
Sachs  edition  both  include  the  poem  in  their  volumes 
for  the  Atonement  Eve.  Sachs  (unlike  de  Sola) 
omits  the  astronomical  sections  in  his  fine  German 
rendering,  and  wisely,  for  the  "  Royal  Crown  " 

79 


BY-PATHS  IN  HEBRAIC  BOOKLAND 

notably  illustrates  the  Greek  epigram :  "  part  may 
be  greater  than  the  whole."  On  the  other  hand,  in 
his  famous  Religiose  Poesie  der  Juden  in  Spanien, 
Sachs  includes  the  omitted  cosmology.  There  is  a 
difference  between  our  attitudes  to  a  poem  as  a 
work  of  literature  and  to  the  same  poem  as  an  in- 
vocation or  prayer.  Sachs  the  scholar  refused  to 
mutilate  the  "  Royal  Crown,"  but  as  a  liturgist 
(though  he  printed  all  the  Hebrew)  he  took  liber- 
ties with  it. 

Sachs  and  de  Sola  were  not  the  only  translators 
of  the  "  Royal  Crown."  In  fact,  to  name  all  who 
have  turned  Ibn  Gebirol's  work  into  modern  lan- 
guages would  need  more  space  than  is  here  avail- 
able. In  her  Jewish  Year,  Mrs.  Lucas — to  name 
the  most  recent  of  Ibn  Gebirol's  translators — has 
exquisitely  rendered  a  large  part  of  the  poem.  I  do 
not  propose  to  quote  from  it,  as  Mrs.  Lucas'  book 
is  available  at  a  small  cost.  And  we  shall,  it  is  to 
be  hoped,  not  have  too  long  to  wait  for  Mr.  Israel 
Zangwill's  promised  rendering. 

What  is  it  that  appeals  to  us  in  Ibn  Gebirol's 
poetry?  Dr.  Cowley  attributes  his  charm  to  "  the 
youthful  freshness  "  of  his  verses,  "  in  which  he 
may  be  compared  to  the  romantic  school  in  France 
and  England  in  the  early  nineteenth  century."  This 

80 


IBN  GEBIROL'S  "  ROYAL  CROWN  " 

same  feature  was  also  detected  by  al-Harizi — a 
better  critic  than  poet.  In  fact,  it  was  his  apprecia- 
tion of  Ibn  Gebirol's  "  youthful  freshness  "  that 
led  him  to  assert  that  the  poet  died  before  his  thir- 
ties had  been  completed.  Al-Harizi  treats  Ibn 
Gebirol's  successors  as  his  imitators.  There  is  a 
large  element  of  truth  in  this.  One  fact  only  need 
be  quoted  in  evidence.  Ibn  Gebirol  entitled  his 
longest  poem  the  "  Royal  Crown  "  (partly,  no 
doubt,  because  of  the  frequent  comparison  of  God 
to  the  King  in  the  Scriptures).  Now,  the  title 
"  Royal  Crown  "  passed  over  to  designate  a  type 
of  poem.  We  find  several  versifiers  who  later  on 
wrote  "  Royal  Crowns,"  just  as  we  speak  of  an 
orator  uttering  a  "  Jeremiad  "  or  a  "  Philippic." 
Heine,  supreme  among  the  modern  Romantics  in 
Germany,  recognized  this  same  freshness  of  inspi- 
ration in  this  freshest  of  the  Spanish  Hebrew  poets : 
a  pious  nightingale  singing  in  the  Gothic  medieval 
night,  a  nightingale  whose  Rose  was  God — these 
are  Heine's  phrases. 

Gustav  Karpeles  again  and  again  claims  that  Ibn 
Gebirol  was  the  first  poet  thrilled  by  "  that  pecu- 
liar ferment  characteristic  of  a  modern  school  " — 
a  ferment  which  the  Germans  name  Weltschmerz. 
Clearly,  Karpeles  made  a  good  point  by  showing 
6  81 


BY-PATHS  IN  HEBRAIC  BOOKLAND 

that  Schopenhauer — of  whom  it  may  be  doubted 
whether  he  despised  women  or  Jews  more 
heartily — the  apostle  of  Weltschmerz,  had  as  a 
predecessor,  eight  centuries  before  his  time,  the  de- 
spised Jew,  the  "  Faust  of  Saragossa."  This  is 
another  of  Karpeles'  epithets  for  Ibn  Gebirol,  who 
spent,  indeed,  some  years  in  Saragossa,  but  had 
little  of  the  Faust  in  him.  If,  however,  we  at- 
tribute to  Ibn  Gebirol  the  feeling  of  Weltschmerz, 
we  must  be  cautious  before  we  identify  his  sense 
of  the  "  world's  misery  "  with  modern  pessimism. 
Ibn  Gebirol's  was,  no  doubt,  a  lonely  and  even 
melancholy  life.  But  though  he  often  writes  sadly, 
though  he  would  have  sympathized  with  William 
Allingham's  sentiment: 

Sin  we  have  explained  away, 
Unluckily  the  sinners  stay; 

yet  the  final  outcome  of  his  realization  of  human 
failings  and  human  pain  was  hope  and  not  despair. 
And  this  I  say  not  because  Ibn  Gebirol  appreciated 
the  humor  of  life  as  well  as  its  miseries.  It  is  not 
his  humorous  verses  on  which  I  should  base  my  be- 
lief in  his  optimism.  For  I  regard  as  the  epitome, 
or  rather,  essential  motive  of  the  "  Royal  Crown," 
the  lines : 

82 


IBN  GEBIROL'S  "  ROYAL  CROWN  " 

Thou  God,  art  the  Light 

That  shall  shine  in  tke  soul  of  the  pure ; 

Now  Thou  art  hidden  by  sin,  by  sin  with  its  cloud  of  night. 

Now  Thou   art  hidden,  but  then,   as  over  the   height, 

Then  shall  Thy  glory  break  through  the  clouds  that  obscure, 

And  be  seen  in  the  mount  of  the  Lord. 

It  is  not  pessimism  but  hope  that  speaks  of  the 
clearer  vision  to  be  won  hereafter.  One  need  not 
love  this  world  less  because  one  loves  the  future 
world  more;  belief  in  continuous  growth  of  the 
soul  is  the  most  optimistic  of  thoughts.  Critics  who 
term  Ibn  Gebirol  a  pessimist  make  the  common 
mistake  of  confounding  despair  with  earnestness. 
Your  truest  optimist  may  be  the  most  serious  of 
men,  just  as  sorrow  may  be  at  its  purest,  its  strong- 
est, in  association  with  hope. 


BAR  HISDAFS  "  PRINCE  AND  DERVISH  " 

The  "  moral  "  is  a  tiresome  feature  about  cer- 
tain types  of  allegory;  we  prefer  that  a  story  should 
tell  us  its  own  tale.  Why  end  off  with  a  "  moral  "  ? 
As  Dr.  Joseph  Jacobs  wrote  in  his  edition  of  Cax- 
ton's  Aesop  (p.  148)  :  "It  seems  absurd  to  give 
your  allegory,  and  then,  in  addition,  the  truth  which 
you  wish  to  convey.  Either  your  fable  makes  its 
point  or  it  does  not.  If  it  does,  you  need  not  re- 
peat your  point;  if  it  does  not,  you  need  not  give 
your  fable.  To  add  your  point  is  practically  to 
confess  the  fear  that  your  fable  has  not  put  it  with 
sufficient  force." 

And  yet  it  seems  probable  that  some  of  the 
world's  stories  would  never  have  been  circulated 
so  widely  but  for  their  morals.  When,  in  the  thir- 
teenth century,  Abraham  Bar  Hisdai,  of  Barcelona, 
produced  his  Prince  and  Dervish,  his  motive  was 
not  to  tell  a  tale  but  to  point  a  moral.  He  had  a 
poor  opinion  of  his  age.  Little  wonder!  Among 
the  delectable  episodes  which  he  witnessed  was  the 
burning  of  some  of  the  works  of  Maimonides  by 

84 


BAR  HISDAI'S  "  PRINCE  AND  DERVISH  " 

monks,  instigated  thereto  by  anti-Maimonist  Jews. 
He  made  his  protest.  But  it  was  not  this  experi- 
ence that  predisposed  him  to  castigate  his  contem- 
poraries. His  language,  in  the  preface  to  his 
Prince  and  Dervish,  is  vague.  The  most  definite 
thing  is  its  grim  earnestness.  His  chance  had  come. 
An  Arabic  book  had  happened  to  fall  under  his 
notice,  and  it  seemed  to  him  the  very  thing !  So  he 
translated  it  into  Hebrew.  And  beautiful  Hebrew 
it  is.  Bar  Hisdai  was  a  master  of  the  style  known 
as  rhymed  prose.  With  him,  however,  it  is  hardly 
prose;  it  is  poetry.  It  is  not  nearly  so  unmetrical 
in  form  as  is  usual  in  this  genre.  There  is  a  lilt 
about  his  unrhythms,  a  regularity  not  so  much  of 
syllables  as  of  stressed  phrases;  and  these  are  marks 
of  verse.  Still  it  is  prose,  as  one  clearly  perceives 
when  Bar  Hisdai,  following  the  rules  of  the  game, 
introduces  snatches  which  are  professedly  poetical. 
Bar  Hisdai,  perhaps  unfortunately,  did  more  than 
translate.  He  considered  his  original  badly  ar- 
ranged, he  says;  so  he  re-arranged  the  material. 
Possibly,  then,  he  added  to  it  stories  taken  from 
other  sources.  A  rather  piquant  problem,  for  in- 
stance, is  presented  by  the  inclusion  of  a  version  of 
the  parable  of  the  sower,  which  in  Bar  Hisdai's 
original  must  have  been  drawn  from  the  New  Tes- 

85 


BY-PATHS  IN  HEBRAIC  BOOKLAND 

tament.  Assuredly  Bar  Hisdai  did  not  derive  it 
from  the  latter  source  directly;  we  are  quite  uncer- 
tain, however,  as  to  the  indirect  route  by  which  it 
reached  him.  This  is,  I  repeat,  a  little  unfortunate, 
because  it  complicates  the  problem  as  to  the  nature 
of  the  Arabic  on  which  he  drew.  The  gain  of  the 
book  as  a  collection  of  tales  carries  with  it  loss 
from  the  point  of  view  of  literary  history. 

Now  what  was  the  book  which  he  called  by  the 
title  usually  rendered  Prince  and  Dervish?  Bar 
Hisdai  names  it  "  King's  Son  and  Nazirite  "  (Ben 
ha-Melek  we-ha-N  azir) .  By  Nazirite  he  means 
ascetic,  and  Dervish  is  a  fair  reproduction  which 
we  owe  to  W.  A.  Meisel  (1847).  A  Dervish  is 
not  the  same  as  the  biblical  Nazirite,  inasmuch  as 
the  former  devoted  himself  to  a  much  wider  range 
of  austerities  than  the  latter.  But  Bar  Hisdai  un- 
doubtedly intends  his  Nazirite  to  be  identical  with 
the  Dervish  type.  How  comes  he  to  use  the  word 
in  this  extended  sense  ?  The  answer  is  easily  found. 
Bar  Hisdai  was  a  hero-worshipper,  and  the  object 
of  his  cult  was  David  Kimhi,  the  famous  gram- 
marian of  Provence.  Almost  pathetic  is  Bar 
Hisdai's  admiration  for  Kimhi.  Now  the  latter, 
in  his  Hebrew  dictionary  (included  in  the  Miklol) 
defines  the  verb  nazar  as  meaning  "  to  abstain  from 

66 


BAR  HISDAI'S  "  PRINCE  AND  DERVISH  " 

eating  and  drinking  and  pleasures"  (compare 
Zechariah  7.  3).  This  was  not  a  new  idea,  for  the 
same  interpretation  is  given  by  Rashi  (loc.  cit.), 
and  is  adumbrated  in  the  talmudic  use  of  the  verb. 
But  I  doubt  whether  Bar  Hisdai  would  have  em- 
ployed the  noun  but  for  Kimhi's  emphatic  defini- 
tion. 

The  Hebrew  title,  which  is  Bar  Hisdai's  own  in- 
vention, well  fits  the  contents.  Briefly,  these  con- 
sist of  a  framework  into  which  are  built  a  number 
of  fables.  An  Indian  king,  fearing  that  his  son  will 
become  a  devotee  of  the  ascetic  life,  places  him 
(like  Johnson's  Rasselas)  in  a  beautiful  palace, 
where  he  is  kept  ignorant  of  human  miseries.  But 
he  comes  under  the  influence  of  a  hermit  (the 
Nazirite),  v/ho  impresses  on  the  prince  the  vanity 
of  life,  and  converts  him  (despite  the  king's  active 
hostility)  to  the  new  way  of  thinking.  It  is  in  the 
course  of  this  narrative  that  the  fables  and  parables 
are  introduced.  Obviously,  however,  Ibn  Hisdai 
was  much  impressed  by  the  narrative  as  such.  "  No 
king  nor  king's  son,  but  a  slave  of  slaves  was  I 
until  thou  didst  set  me  free  to  understand  and  obey 
God's  Law  " — thus  does  Ibn  Hisdai's  romance 
sum  up  the  moral  at  its  close,  the  speaker  being  the 
prince,  and  the  one  addressed  the  Nazirite. 

87 


BY-PATHS  IN  HEBRAIC  BOOKLAND 

A  most  significant  point  to  be  noted  is  that 
India  is  the  scene  of  the  story.  In  1850  Stein- 
schneider  discovered  the  truth.  And  a  surprising 
truth  it  is.  The  same  story  was  known  to  medieval 
Christians  as  the  Romance  of  Earlaam  and  Josa- 
phat.  But  the  whole  is  nothing  more  or  less  than 
an  account  of  the  life  of  Buddha,  the  great  Indian 
saint,  the  founder  of  a  religion.  Jews,  Moham- 
medans, and  Christians  revelled  in  the  story  with- 
out having  a  notion  as  to  its  original  significance. 
Nothing  so  brings  races  and  creeds  together  as  a 
good  tale.  The  folk  are  united  by  their  common 
interest  in  the  same  lore.  Mr.  Zangwill,  in  his 
beautiful  poem  prefixed  to  Dr.  Jacobs'  edition  of 
Earlaam  and  Josaphat,  looks  deeper,  and  finds  in 
the  general  admiration  for  this  legend  a  symbol  of 
the  universal  identity  of  men's  aspirations  for  the 
ideal. 

Was  Barlaam  truly  Josaphat, 

And  Buddha  truly  each? 
What  better  parable  than  that 

The  unity  to  preach — 

The  simple  brotherhood  of  souls 

That  seek  the  highest  good ; 
He  who  in  kingly  chariot  rolls, 

Or  wears  the  hermit's  hood! 


BAR  HISDAI'S  "  PRINCE  AND  DERVISH  " 

Bar  Hisdai  felt  nothing  of  this  religious  cosmo- 
politanism. But  he  realized  that  devotion  to  a 
spiritual  ideal  was  a  lesson  he  might  profitably 
present  to  his  age  in  the  guise  of  allegory. 

If,  however,  Bar  Hisdai  chose  the  story  for  its 
moral,  his  readers  we  may  be  certain  swallowed 
the  moral  because  of  the  story — rather,  one  should 
say,  the  stories.  It  is  remarkable  that  the  Hebrew 
version  is  much  fuller  in  its  parables,  containing, 
as  Dr.  Jacobs  estimates,  no  less  than  ten  not  found 
in  the  other  versions.  Even  Bar  Hisdai  must,  after 
all,  have  been  drawn  to  the  parables  as  such,  else 
why  add  to  their  number?  At  all  events,  so  far  as 
his  readers  went,  the  Prince  and  Dervish  made  its 
appeal  by  its  stories  rather  than  by  its  doctrines. 
And  what  stories  they  are  !  Several  of  the  world's 
classics  are  in  Barlaam,  the  sources  of  more  than 
one  of  the  best  known  dramas  of  later  ages,  some 
of  the  favorite  parables  of  the  world,  immortal  as 
human  life  itself.  Bar  Hisdai  omits  the  caskets, 
which  Shakespeare  used  in  the  Merchant  of  Venice, 
and  the  "  Three  Friends  "  (wealth,  family,  good 
deeds),  the  last  of  which  alone  accompanies  a  man 
to  the  grave,  the  plot  of  that  famous  morality  play, 
Everyman.  The  omission  is  curious,  for  both  of 
these  tales  are  found  in  the  Midrash.  But  Bar 


BY-PATHS  IN  HEBRAIC  BOOKLAND 

Hisdai  gives  us  the  original  of  King  Cophetua — 
the  beggar-maid  who  weds  the  king.  Bar  Hisdai 
alone  gives  us  the  story  of  "  The  Robbers' 
Nemesis  " — the  two  who  plot  to  rob  the  traveller, 
but,  envying  each  the  other  his  share  in  the  spoil, 
each  poisons  the  other  rascal's  food,  and  the  travel- 
ler escapes.  He  also  alone  tells  of  the  "  Greedy 
Dog,"  who,  in  his  anxiety  to  attend  two  wedding 
breakfasts  on  the  same  day,  misses  both.  But  we 
cannot  go  through  all.  One  other,  found  only  in 
Bar  Hisdai,  is  thus  summarized  by  Dr.  Jacobs : 

A  king,  hunting,  invites  a  shepherd  to  eat  with  him  in  the  heat 
of  the  day : 

Shepherd:    I  cannot  eat  with  thee,  for  I  have  already  promised 

another  greater  than  thee. 
King:   Who  is  that? 

Shepherd:    God,  who  has  invited  me  to  fast. 
King:    But  why  fast  on  such  a  hot  day? 
Shepherd:    I  fast  for  a  day  still  hotter  than  this. 
King:    Eat  to-day,  fast  to-morrow. 
Shepherd:   Yes,  if  you  will  guarantee  that  I  shall  see  to-morrow. 

Such  stories  are  sure  to  see  many  a  to-morrow. 
And  among  the  best  records  of  them,  among  the 
most  notable  repertoires  of  the  world's  wit  and 
wisdom,  Bar  Hisdai's  Prince  and  Dervish  has  a 
sure  place. 

90 


THE  SARAJEVO  HAGGADAH 

Sarajevo,  scene  of  the  crime  which  led  to  the 
outbreak  of  the  European  War,  has  its  more  pleas- 
ant associations.  The  place  is  forever  connected 
with  the  history  of  Jewish  art,  and  in  particular 
with  the  illumination  of  the  Passover  Home- 
Service  or  Haggadah. 

Wonderful  in  the  old  sense  of  the  word — that 
is  to  say,  astonishing — is  the  fact  that,  though  the 
Sarajevo  Haggadah  was  printed  a  good  many  years 
ago  (in  1898),  there  have  been  no  imitations.  The 
splendid  Russian  publication  of  Stassof  and  Giinz- 
burg  certainly  came  more  recently  (1905),  but  it 
cannot  be  compared  with  the  Hungarian  work  of 
Miiller  and  Von  Schlossar.  "  L'Ornement  Hebreu  " 
is  scrappy;  the  "  Haggada  von  Sarajevo,"  though  it 
includes  many  selections  from  other  manuscripts, 
is  a  unity.  In  one  point,  however,  the  Russians 
were  right.  For  a  Jewish  illuminative  art  we  must 
look  rather  to  masoretic  margins  than  to  full-page 
pictures*  The  former  must  be  characteristically 
Jewish,  the  latter,  though  found  in  Hebrew  litur- 
gies and  scrolls,  are  often  non- Jewish  types.  This 

91 


BY-PATHS  IN  HEBRAIC  BOOKLAND 

is  clearly  shown  by  the  famous  picture  in  the 
Sarajevo  Haggadah  wherein  is  probably  depicted 
the  Deity  resting  after  the  work  of  creation.  But 
for  all  that,  the  Sarajevo  book  must  remain  supreme 
as  an  introduction  to  Jewish  art,  so  long  as  it  con- 
tinues to  be  the  only  completely  reproduced  Hebrew 
illuminated  manuscript  of  the  Middle  Ages. 

One  would  like  to  hope  that  it  will  not  always 
retain  this  unique  position.  The  Crawford  Hag- 
gadah (now  in  the  Rylands  Library,  Manchester) 
is  certainly  older,  and,  in  my  judgment,  finer.  It  is 
true  that  the  editors  of  the  Sarajevo  manuscript 
claim  that  theirs  is  the  most  ancient  illuminated 
Haggadah  extant.  They  admit  that  the  text  of  the 
Crawford  Haggadah  is  older  by  at  least  half-a- 
century,  but  assert  that  the  full-page  pictures  be- 
long to  the  fifteenth  century,  thus  falling  two 
centuries  after  the  text.  I  altogether  contest  this 
statement.  But  even  if  it  were  conceded,  never- 
theless the  beauty  of  the  Crawford  Haggadah  con- 
sists just  in  the  text,  in  the  beautiful  margins,  full 
of  spirited  grotesques  and  arabesques,  no  doubt 
(like  the  Sarajevo  manuscript  itself)  produced  in 
Spain  under  strong  North  French  influence.  Mr. 
Frank  Haes  executed  a  complete  photograph  of 
the  Crawford  manuscript,  and  it  ought  undoubt- 


THE  SARAJEVO  HAGGADAH 

edly  to  be  published.  As  I  write,  I  have  before 
me  two  pages  of  Mr.  Haes'  reproduction — the 
dayyenu  passage;  nothing  in  Jewish  illuminated 
work  can  approach  this,  unless  it  be  the  rather 
inferior,  but  very  beautiful,  British  Museum 
manuscript  of  the  same  type.  The  editors  of  the 
Sarajevo  Haggadah  were  ill-advised  in  omitting 
to  repoduce  the  whole  of  the  text  of  their  precious 
original.  It  is  in  the  text  that  the  genuine  excel- 
lence of  the  Jewish  manuscripts  is  to  be  found. 

But  the  Sarajevo  Haggadah  gives  us  too  much 
that  is  delightful  for  us  to  cavil  over  what  it  does 
not  give.  Here  we  have,  in  the  full-page  drawings, 
depicted  the  history  of  Israel  from  the  days  of  the 
Creation,  the  patriarchal  story,  Joseph  in  Egypt, 
the  coming  of  Moses,  the  Egyptian  plagues,  the 
exodus,  the  revelation,  the  temple  that  is  yet  to  be. 
Very  interesting  is  the  picture  of  a  synagogue.  This 
late  thirteenth  (or  early  fourteenth)  century  sketch 
evidently  knows  nothing  of  the  now  most  usual 
ornament  of  a  synagogue — the  tablets  of  the  deca- 
logue over  the  ark.  On  this  subject,  however,  I 
have  written  elsewhere,  and  as  my  remarks  have 
been  published,  I  can  pass  over  this  point  on  the 
present  occasion.  I  have  mentioned  above  the  strik- 
ing attempt  to  depict  the  Deity,  but  it  is  equally 

93 


BY-PATHS  IN  HEBRAIC  BOOKLAND 

noteworthy  that  in  the  revelation  picture  no  such 
attempt  is  made.  Into  Moses'  ear  a  horn  conveys 
the  inspired  message ;  but  the  artist  does  not  intro- 
duce God.  At  least,  one  hopes  not.  We  pre- 
fer to  regard  the  figure  at  the  top  of  the  mountain 
as  Moses,  and  it  is  not  difficult  to  account  in  that 
case  for  the  figure  standing  rather  lower  up  the 
hill,  also  holding  the  tablets.  We  must  assume 
that  this  under  figure  is  Aaron,  though  it  is  not 
recorded  that  he  received  the  tablets  from  his 
brother.  There  is  another  possibility.  In  the 
medieval  illuminations  it  was  a  frequent  device  to 
express  various  parts  of  a  continuous  scene  in  the 
same  drawing.  Thus  the  Sarajevo  artist  may  have 
intended  to  show  us  Moses  in  two  positions,  and 
though  the  method  lacks  perspective,  the  effect  is 
not  devoid  of  realistic  power.  That  this  is  prob- 
ably the  true  explanation  of  the  Sinai  scene  is  sug- 
gested by  another — Jacob's  dream.  Here  we  see 
Jacob  asleep  (with  one  angel  descending,  another 
higher  up  ascending  the  ladder — the  artist  has  not 
troubled  himself  with  the  problem  as  to  how  the 
angels  contrived  to  cross  one  another).  But  we 
also  see  Jacob  awake,  on  the  same  picture,  for  he 
is  anointing  the  Beth-el  stone  and  converting  it  into 
an  altar. 

94 


THE  SARAJEVO  HAGGADAH 

Certainly  the  drawings,  sadly  though  they  lack 
proportion,  are  realistic.  Especially  is  this  true  of 
the  portrayal  of  Lot's  wife  transformed  into  a 
pillar  of  salt.  Disproportionate  in  size,  for  she  is 
taller  than  Sodom's  loftiest  pinnacles,  yet  the  artist 
has  succeeded  in  suggesting  the  gradual  stiffening 
of  her  figure:  we  see  her  becoming  rigid  before 
our  eyes.  There  is  clearly  much  that  modern 
artists  might  learn  from  these  medieval  gropings 
towards  realism.  Some  artists  have  already 
learned  much.  It  is  quite  obvious,  for  instance, 
that  Burne-Jones  must  have  steeped  himself  in  the 
suggestive  mysticism  of  the  Middle  Ages  before  he 
painted  his  marvellous  Creation  series.  The  paral- 
lel between  his  series  and  the  series  in  the  Sarajevo 
Haggadah  is  undeniable.  Though  he  never  saw 
this  Haggadah,  he  was  well  acquainted  with  similar 
work  in  the  Missals.  Just  as  Keats  evolved  his 
theory  as  to  the  identity  of  truth  and  beauty  from  a 
Greek  vase,  so  the  pre-Raphaelites  re-told  on  vases 
what  they  read  in  their  moments  of  communion 
with  the  medieval  spirit. 

And  this  leads  to  what  must  be  my  last  word  now 
on  this  Hebrew  masterpiece.  If  a  Burne-Jones  can 
thus  imitate,  why  not  a  Solomon  or  a  Lilien?  The 
latter  has  now  produced  a  series  of  illustrations  to 

95 


BY-PATHS  IN  HEBRAIC  BOOKLAND 

the  Bible,  but  we  want  something  less  coldly  classic, 
something  more  warmly  symbolic.  It  was  indi- 
cated above,  with  regret,  that  Mr.  Haes'  photo- 
graphs of  the  Crawford  Haggadah  are  still 
unpublished.  But  over  and  above  reproductions 
of  extant  works,  we  need  new  works.  Now  the 
Jewish  artist  who  illustrates  a  Bible  ought  not  to 
be  content  to  illustrate  anything  but  a  Hebrew  text. 
And  if  a  Bible  be  for  several  reasons  out  of  the 
question,  why  should  we  not  have  a  new  Hagga- 
dah, written  by  a  living  Jewish  artist,  who  shall, 
from  a  close  study  of  olden  models,  do  for  us  what 
Burne-Jones  did? — that  is,  extract  from  the  mys- 
ticism of  a  by-gone  age  those  abiding  truths  which 
our  contemporary  age  demands  of  its  art. 


A  PIYYUT  BY  BAR  ABUN 

Not  every  one  named  Solomon  was  Ibn  Gebirol. 
The  medieval  poets  often  signed  their  verses  by  an 
acrostic.  Now,  when  a  poem  has  the  signature  of 
a  particular  name,  the  natural  tendency  has  been 
to  ascribe  it  to  the  most  famous  bearer  of  the  name. 
Of  all  the  poetical  Solomons,  Ibn  Gebirol  was,  be- 
yond question,  the  greatest.  Zunz  was  the  first 
who  clearly  discriminated  between  the  various 
authors  called  by  the  same  personal  name.  The 
hymn  "Judge  of  all  the  Earth"  (Shofet  Kol 
ha-Arez}  was  certainly  by  a  Solomon;  Zunz  iden- 
tifies him  with  the  Frenchman  Solomon,  son  of 
Abun.  This  Solomon  is  described  as  "  the  youth  " 
(ha-Na'ar),  perhaps  in  the  sense  that  there  was  a 
"  senior  "  poet  of  the  same  name.  According  to 
Zunz,  again,  Solomon  bar  Abun's  period  of  active 
authorship  lay  presumably  between  the  years  1170 
and  1190.  (Liter aturgeschichte  der  synagogalen 
Poesie,  p.  311.) 

Of  all  his  works  the  piyyut  we  are  considering  is 
by  far  the  most  popular.  A  spirited  rendering  of 
the  poem,  by  Mrs.  R.  N.  Salaman,  may  be  found 
7  n? 


BY-PATHS  IN  HEBRAIC  BOOKLAND 

in  the  Routledge  Mahzor  so  ably  edited  in  pait  by 
her  father.  (See  the  Day  of  Atonement,  morning 
service,  page  86.)  Three  stanzas  had,  however, 
long  before  been  published  by  Mrs.  Henry  Lucas 
in  her  Jewish  Year  (p.  44).  Some  years  ago  the 
same  gifted  translator  completed  the  whole  of  the 
hymn,  and  her  version  is  now  printed  here  in  full. 
I  say  "  in  full,"  though  there  is  a  longer  form  of 
the  poem  containing  six  verses.  Zunz,  however, 
only  assigns  five  verses  to  the  original,  and  the 
sixth  verse  is  probably  an  unauthorized  addition. 
It  repeats  the  idea  of  the  second  verse,  and  also 
disturbs  the  acrostic  signature.  This  piyyut  or 
hymn  must  have  been  designed  for  the  New  Year. 
True,  in  the  only  "  German  "  Mahzor  known  to 
many,  the  poem  is  included  among  the  Selihot  for 
the  Day  of  Atonement.  Though,  however,  Solo- 
mon bar  Abun's  masterpiece  is  fairly  suitable  for 
the  Fast,  it  is  not  altogether  appropriate  for  that 
occasion.  The  "  German  "  rite,  accordingly,  is 
well  advised  when  it  also  employs  the  piyyut  for 
the  day  before  New  Year.  Even  more  to  be  com- 
mended are  those  liturgies — the  Yemenite  and 
some  of  the  "  Spanish  " — which  appoint  the  poem 
for  the  New  Year  itself.  That  is  obviously  its  true 
place.  With  its  opening  phrase,  "  Judge  of  all  the 

98 


A  PIYYUT  BY  BAR  ABUN 

earth,"  the  hymn  declares  its  character.  It  was 
written  for  the  Day  of  Judgment — that  is,  for  the 
New  Year's  Day.  Moreover,  these  initial  words 
are  taken  from  Abraham's  intercession  for  the  sin- 
ners of  Sodom  (Genesis  18.  25),  and  this  is  pre- 
ceded by  the  announcement  of  Isaac's  birth,  an 
incident  which  one  form  of  the  Jewish  tradition 
connects  with  the  New  Year.  It  must  be  remem- 
bered in  general  that  prayers  intended  originally 
for  one  occasion  were  often  transferred  to  others. 
Thus  the  'Alenu  prayer,  now  used  every  day,  was 
at  first  composed  for  the  New  Year  Musaf. 

Let  us  now  turn  to  the  poem  itself,  which,  as 
already  stated,  is  reproduced  in  the  version  from 
the  hand  of  Mrs.  Lucas. 

Judge  of  the  earth,  who  wilt  arraign 

The  nations  at  thy  judgment  seat, 
With  life  and  favor  bless  again 

Thy  people  prostrate  at  thy  feet. 
And  mayest  Thou  our  morning  prayer 
Receive,  O  Lord,  as  though  it  were 
The  offering  that  was  wont  to  be 
Brought  day  by  day  continually. 

Thou  who  art  clothed  with  righteousness, 

Supreme,  exalted  over  all — 
How  oft  soever  we  transgress, 

Do  Thou  with  pardoning  love  recall 
99 


BY-PATHS  IN  HEBRAIC  BOOKLAND 

Those  who  in  Hebron  sleep:  and  let 
Their  memory  live  before  Thee  yet, 
Even  as  the  offering  unto  Thee 
Offered  of  old  continually. 

O  Thou,  whose  mercy  faileth  not, 

To  us  Thy  heavenly  grace  accord; 
Deal  kindly  with  Thy  people's  lot, 

And  grant  them  life,  our  King  and  Lord. 
Let  Thou  the  mark  of  life  appear 
Upon  their  brow  from  year  to  year, 
As  when  were  daily  wont  to  be 
The  offerings  brought  continually. 

Restore  to  Zion  once  again 

Thy  favor   and  the  ancient  might 

And  glory  of  her  sacred  fane, 
And  let  the  son  of  Jesse's  light 

Be  set  on  high,  to  shine  always, 

Far  shedding  its  perpetual  rays, 

Even  as  of  old  were  wont  to  be 

The  offerings  brought  continually. 

Trust  in  God's  strength,  and  be  ye  strong, 

My  people,  and  His  law  obey, 
Then  will  He  pardon  sin  and  wrong, 

Then  mercy  will  his  wrath  outweigh; 
Seek  ye  His  presence,  and  implore 
His  countenance  for  evermore. 
Then  shall  your  prayers  accepted  be 
As  offerings  brought  continually. 

100 


A  PIYYUT  BY  BAR  ABUN 

When  this  is  sung  or  declaimed  to  the  appro- 
priate melody  (on  which  the  Rev.  F.  L.  Cohen 
has  much  of  interest  to  say  in  the  Jewish  Encyclo- 
pedia, xi,  306),  the  solemn  effect  of  words  and 
music  is  profound.  The  refrain  (from  Numbers 
28.  23),  recalls  the  close  association  which,  even 
while  the  sanctuary  stood,  subsisted  between  temple 
sacrifices  and  synagogue  prayers.  Since  the  loss  of 
the  shrine,  prayer  has  fulfilled  the  double  function. 
There  are  only  one  or  two  phrases  that  need  eluci- 
dation. In  the  second  stanza  the  words  "  Those 
who  in  Hebron  sleep  "  refer  to  those  of  the  patri- 
archs who  were  buried  in  Hebron,  in  the  cave  of 
Machpelah.  The  appeal  is  made  to  the  merits  of 
the  fathers,  a  subject  on  which  the  reader  will  do 
well  to  consult  the  Rev.  S.  Levy's  essay  in  his  vol- 
ume entitled  "  Original  Virtue."  In  the  third 
stanza  occurs  the  phrase  "  mark  of  life."  This  is 
derived  from  the  ninth  chapter  of  Ezekiel — those 
bearing  the  "  mark  "  are,  in  the  prophet's  vision,  to 
live  amid  the  general  destruction.  Life — the  mer- 
ciful verdict  of  the  Judge,  quite  as  much  as  the 
judgment  itself — is  the  note  of  the  New  Year 
liturgy.  This  poem  strikes  both  notes  with  undeni- 
able power. 


101 


ISAAC'S  LAMP  AND  JACOB'S  WELL 

To  have  one's  Hebrew  book  turned  into  the  cur- 
rent speech,  to  have  it  read  part  by  part  in  the 
synagogue  by  one's  fellows  as  a  substitute  for  ser- 
mons, is  not  a  common  experience.  Isaac  Aboab 
enjoyed  this  honor.  His  Menorat  ha-Maor,  or 
Candelabrum  of  the  Light,  written  in  Spain  some- 
where about  the  year  1300,  according  to  Zunz,  or 
in  France  a  little  before  1400,  according  to  Dr. 
Efros,  became  one  of  the  most  popular  books  of  the 
late  Middle  Ages. 

Well  it  deserved  the  favor  which  it  won.  The 
Talmud,  said  Aboab,  may  be  used  by  the  learned 
in  their  investigations  of  law.  But  for  the  masses, 
he  felt,  it  has  also  a  message.  Aboab  was  the  first 
(unless  Dr.  Efros  be  right  in  claiming  this  honor 
for  Israel  Alnaqua)  to  pick  out  from  the  Talmud 
and  Midrash,  from  the  gaonic  and  even  later 
rabbinic  writings,  passages  of  every-day  morals, 
ethical  principles,  secular  and  religious  wisdom. 
Aboab's  work  was  not,  however,  a  mere  hap-hazard 
collection  of  detached  sentences  and  maxims. 

102 


ISAAC'S  LAMP  AND  JACOB'S  WELL 

Zedner  (Catalogue,  p.  381),  does  not  hesitate  to 
term  it  a  "  System  of  Moral  Laws  as  explained  in 
the  Talmud."  Indeed,  the  book  is  surprisingly 
systematic.  The  first,  or  among  the  first,  of  its 
kind,  it  is  also  a  most  conspicuous  example  of  the 
due  ordering  of  materials. 

The  very  title,  also  used  by  Alnaqua,  and  derived 
from  Numbers  4.  9,  was  an  inspiration.  It  conveys 
the  idea  of  "  illumination,"  than  which  no  idea 
penetrates  deeper  into  the  spiritual  life.  Fanci- 
fully enough,  Aboab  continues  the  metaphor  into 
the  main  divisions  of  his  book.  The  Menorah 
(Candelabrum)  of  the  Pentateuch  branched  out 
into  seven  lamps,  and  so  Aboab's  book  is  divided 
also  into  "  Seven  Lamps."  It  is  strange  that  he 
did  not  carry  the  metaphor  further.  He  divides 
each  of  his  "  Lamps  "  into  Parts  and  Chapters, 
with  a  Prologue  and  an  Epilogue  to  each  Lamp. 
The  fourth  chapter  of  Zechariah  might  have  given 
him  "  olive-trees  "  for  his  Prologues,  "  bowls  " 
for  his  Epilogues,  and  "  pipes  "  for  his  Parts, 
while  "  wicks "  might  have  served  instead  of 
Chapters.  In  point  of  fact,  the  "  Seven  Wicks  " 
was  the  title  chosen  by  Aboab's  epitomator,  Moses 
Frankfurt,  when  he  constructed  a  reduced  copy  of 
Aboab's  Candelabrum  (Amsterdam,  1721). 

103 


BY-PATHS  IN  HEBRAIC  BOOKLAND 

To  return  to  Aboab's  original  work,  Lamp  I 
deals  with  Retribution,  Desire,  and  Passion, 
Honor,  and  High-place — the  motives  and  ends  of 
moral  conduct.  In  Lamp  II  is  unfolded  the  rab- 
binic teaching  on  Irreverence,  Hypocrisy,  Profana- 
tion of  the  Name,  Frivolity  as  distinct  from  Joy — 
the  causes  which  impede  morality.  Then,  in 
Lamp  III — the  largest  Lamp  of  all  the  seven — we 
have  morality  at  work  practically,  and  are  in- 
structed as  to  the  worth  of  religious  exercises, 
charitable  life,  social  and  domestic  virtue,  justice 
in  man's  dealings  with  his  fellows.  Next,  in 
Lamp  IV,  is  unfolded  the  duty  and  the  great  re- 
ward of  studying  the  Law,  as  a  beautiful  corollary 
to  the  love  and  fear  of  God.  Far-reaching  in  its 
analysis  of  the  human  soul  is  Lamp  V,  on  Repen- 
tance. Lamp  VI  may  be  described  as  presenting 
the  good  Rule  for  body  and  mind,  the  amenities  of 
life  as  shown  in  character.  Or  perhaps  one  might 
better  put  it  that  this  section  shows  us  how  to  be 
gentlemen,  clean,  wholesome,  considerate.  Then 
Lamp  VII  completes  the  whole.  It  sets  out  the 
ideals  of  Humility  and  Modesty,  virtues  which  are 
the  end,  nay,  the  beginning  also,  of  the  noblest 
human  possibilities,  for  these  virtues  are  first  in 
those  wherein  man  may  imitate  God. 

104 


ISAAC'S  LAMP  AND  JACOB'S  WELL 

Appropriately,  Aboab  follows  up  his  glorious 
eulogy  of  Humility  with  a  full  confession  of  his 
own  shortcomings.  He  knows  that  his  compilation 
is  imperfect.  "  Some  things  I  have  omitted,"  he 
explains,  "  because  I  have  never  read  them ;  others 
because  I  have  forgotten  them."  "  Some  passages 
I  left  out,"  he  goes  on,  "  as  too  abstruse  for  general 
reading,  others  as  alien  to  the  purpose  of  my  book, 
others  again  because  liable  to  misunderstanding, 
and  liable  to  do  more  harm  than  good."  Wise 
man !  Unfortunately  not  every  imitator  of  Aboab 
has  displayed  the  same  excellent  judgment.  The 
olden  Jewish  literature  is  so  abundantly  full  of 
beauties  that  it  is  an  ill-service  to  repeat  the  few 
things  of  lesser  value.  Aboab's  Candelabrum  of 
the  Light  is  in  this  respect  superior  to  its  great 
rival,  Ibn  Habib's  Well  of  Jacob.  Up  to  half-a- 
century  ago  the  two  books  must  have  run  each 
other  very  close  as  regards  the  number  of  editions ; 
more  recently  Ibn  Habib's  book  (the  'En  Ya'akob) 
has  probably  surged  ahead.  Readers  may  be  re- 
minded of  the  difference  in  method.  Ibn  Habib 
takes  the  talmudic  tractates  one  by  one,  and  ex- 
tracts from  each  its  haggadic  elements.  There  is 
no  attempt  at  any  other  order  than  that  of  the 
Talmud.  The  Well  of  Jacob,  moreover,  includes 

105 


BY-PATHS  IN  HEBRAIC  BOOKLAND 

everything,  the  folk-lore  as  well  as  the  ethics.  To 
the  student,  Ibn  Habib's  service  was  greater  than 
Aboab's ;  the  relation  is  reversed  from  the  point  of 
view  of  the  man  or  woman  in  search  of  vital 
religion. 

The  Well  of  Jacob,  it  must  be  allowed,  is  in  itself 
almost  as  good  a  title  as  that  which  Aboab  chose. 
Ibn  Habib  himself  seems  to  have  used  the  Hebrew 
word  'En  rather  in  the  sense  of  "  Substance  "  or 
"  Essence  " — his  work  reproduced  the  "  Essence  " 
of  the  talmudic  Haggadah.  But  Jacob's  Well,  as 
the  Midrash  has  it,  was  the  source  whence  was 
drawn  the  Holy  Spirit.  Despite  my  personal  pref- 
erence for  Aboab's  Menorah,  it  must  be  freely 
acknowledged  that  many  generations  have  quaffed 
from  Ibn  Habib's  reservoir  fine  spiritual  draughts. 
And  still  quaff.  For  just  as  Aboab's  Lamp  still 
shines,  so  Jacob's  Well  has  not  yet  run  dry. 

Over  and  above  the  similarity  of  contents,  with 
all  the  dissimilarity  of  method,  there  is  another 
reason  why  one  thinks  of  the  works  of  Aboab  and 
Ibn  Habib  together.  Though  Aboab  wrote  con- 
siderably before  Ibn  Habib,  their  books  appeared 
for  the  first  time  in  print  almost  simultaneously. 
Ibn  Habib's  book  came  out  as  the  author  com- 
piled it;  in  point  of  fact  it  was  the  son  who 

106 


ISAAC'S  LAMP  AND  JACOB'S  WELL 

completed  the  publication,  because  Jacob  Ibn 
Habib  died  while  the  earlier  sections  of  his  work 
were  passing  through  the  press.  If,  as  seems  prob- 
able, the  Lamp  was  first  kindled  in  1511,  or  1514, 
and  the  Well  began  to  pour  its  fertilizing  streams 
in  1516,  Aboab  had  the  start;  but  these  dates  are 
uncertain.  All  that  we  can  state  with  confidence  is 
that  both  books  appeared  in  print  quite  early  in 
the  sixteenth  century,  not  later  than  1516.  The 
earliest  editions  of  both  books  are  scarce,  and  from 
a  simple  cause.  Few  copies  have  survived  because 
the  owners  of  the  copies  wore  them  out.  Read  and 
re-read,  thumbed  by  many  hands,  by  "  the  Jewish 
woman,  the  workman,  the  rank  and  file  of  Israel," 
the  copies  were  used  up  by  those  who  treated  books 
as  something  to  hold  in  the  hand  and  not  to  keep  on 
a  shelf  out  of  reach.  My  own  edition  of  the  Can- 
delabrum, that  of  Amsterdam  (1739),  boasts 
justly  of  the  excellent  paper  on  which  it  is  printed. 
None  the  less  does  this  copy,  too,  show  signs  of 
frequent  perusal.  The  best  books  were  the  worst 
preserved,  because  they  were  the  best  treated. 
What  better  treatment  of  a  book  can  there  be  than 
to  read  it  so  often  that  its  pages  no  longer  hold  to- 
gether, its  margins  fray,  and  its  title-page  suffers 
mutilation? 

107 


"  LETTERS  OF  OBSCURE  MEN  " 

Does  ridicule  kill?  If  it  did,  then,  as  fools  are 
always  with  us,  folly  would  ever  possess  the  flavor 
of  novelty.  And  yet  to-day's  fool  looks  and  does 
very  much  the  same  as  yesterday's,  even  though 
wise  men  laughed  their  fill  at  the  latter.  Folly,  one 
rather  must  admit,  is  immortal.  Wise  men  come 
and  wise  men  go,  but  fools  go  on  forever. 
Wisdom  can  at  most  make  the  fool  look  foolish  for 
a  while. 

At  rare  intervals,  however,  history  offers  an  ex- 
ample of  the  slaying  power  of  satire.  Idolatry  was 
killed  by  ridicule.  Some  people — among  them 
Renan,  who  ought  to  have  known  better — deny  to 
ancient  Israel  a  sense  of  humor.  But  who  can 
doubt  that  the  most  effective  of  the  attacks  on  idol- 
atry were  Elijah's  sarcastic  invective  against  the 
Baal  of  the  populace  (I  Kings  18.  27)  and  Isaiah's 
grim  yet  droll  picture  of  the  carpenter  taking  some 
timber  and  using  part  of  it  to  bake  his  bread  and 
the  rest  to  make  his  god  (Isaiah  44.  15 )  ?  It  is  far 
from  our  purpose  to  recite  the  success,  in  after 
ages,  of  less  inspired  efforts  by  satirists.  Satire  has 
been  termed  the  "  chief  refuge  of  the  weak  ";  it 

108 


"  LETTERS  OF  OBSCURE  MEN  " 

has  certainly  been  a  weapon  by  which  one,  standing 
alone,  has  often  equalized  the  odds  against  him. 
It  would  be  delightful  to  give  illustrations  of  the 
methods  by  which  the  various  warriors  of  the  pen 
have  used  their  sword :  to  contrast  a  pagan  Juvenal 
and  a  Hebrew  Kalonymos — both  writing  in  Rome, 
but  with  more  than  a  millennium  between  them — 
or  to  revel  in  the  feats  of  Rabelais'  Gargantua 
(J534)>  Cervantes'  Don  Quixote  (1605),  Pascal's 
Provincial  Letters  (1656),  and  Voltaire's  eight- 
eenth century  Candide.  We  are  now  concerned 
with  a  work  and  a  group  of  authors  who  first  made 
Europe  laugh  in  1515.  Ulrich  von  Hutten  and  his 
associates,  in  their  "  Letters  of  Obscure  Men  " 
(Epistolae  Obscurorum  Virorum],  did  just  the 
right  thing  at  the  right  moment.  What  they  at- 
tempted, what  they  accomplished,  will  now  be  told. 
Cervantes,  tilting  against  the  wearisome  nonsense 
of  the  later  romances  of  chivalry,  Pascal  exposing — 
even  though  he  did  it  unfairly —  the  dangers  of 
casuistry,  Voltaire  plumbing  the  shallow  optimism 
of  Leibnitz,  served  good  ends.  But  far  higher 
than  these  was  the  cause  triumphantly  upheld  by 
the  Letters  of  Obscure  Men.  The  cause  was 
humanism,  another  name  for  intellectual  freedom 
and  width  of  view. 

109 


BY-PATHS  IN  HEBRAIC  BOOKLAND 

Briefly  put,  at  the  crisis  in  the  fortune  of  the 
new  learning  in  Europe,  when  the  struggle  was 
at  its  sharpest  between  ignorance  and  enlighten- 
ment, the  vindication  of  the  Talmud  became  iden- 
tified with  the  overthrow  of  intellectual  bigotry. 
Pfefferkorn  wished  to  burn  the  Talmud.  He  was 
a  shady  character,  and  from  his  first  condition  as  a 
bad  Jew  became,  in  Erasmus'  phrase,  a  worse  Chris- 
tian ("  ex  scclerato  Judaeo  sceleratissimus  Chris- 
tianus").  Pfefferkorn  hurled  against  his  former 
coreligionists  the  usual  missiles  of  abuse.  Why  is 
it  that  the  converted  Jew  is  so  often  a  bitter  assail- 
ant of  Judaism?  Some  answer  that  it  is  because 
the  renegade  must  prove  that  he  forsook  some- 
thing execrable.  Others  would  have  it  that  intrin- 
sic vileness  of  character  is  responsible.  But  is  it 
not  more  probable  that  apostate  virulence  is  due 
simply  to  ignorance  ?  And  this  is  the  more  obnox- 
ious when  the  animosity  takes  the  form  of  an  at- 
tack on  literature.  "  Ignorance,  which  in  matters 
of  morals  extenuates  the  crime,  is  itself,  in  matters 
of  literature,  a  crime  of  the  first  order."  So  said 
Joubert,  and  the  remark  can  be  freely  illustrated 
from  the  Pfefferkorns.  When  a  real  scholar  leaves 
the  synagogue,  he  is  rarely  among  the  anti-Semites. 
Daniel  Chwolson  and  Paul  Cassel  in  their  career  as 

110 


"LETTERS  OF  OBSCURE  MEN" 

Judaeo-Christians  were  champions  of  the  Jewish 
cause  against  such  very  libels  as  a  Pf efferkorn  would 
circulate.  At  the  beginning  of  the  sixteenth  century 
the  defence  of  Judaism  was  in  equally  scholarly 
hands. 

But  it  was  not  on  Jews,  whether  by  race  or  re- 
ligion, that  reliance  was  then  placed.  Reuchlin — 
as  all  the  world  knows — saw  no  reason  why  the 
Talmud  should  be  condemned,  and  he  expressed 
his  opinion  in  clear  terms.  Reuchlin,  be  it  remem- 
bered, was  the  most  learned  German  of  his  age. 
"  By  a  singular  combination  of  taste  and  talents 
this  remarkable  man  excelled  at  once  as  a  humanist 
and  a  man  of  affairs,  as  a  jurist  and  a  mystic,  and, 
above  all,  as  a  pioneer  among  Orientalists,  so  that 
it  has  been  said  of  him,  enthusiastically  but  not 
unjustly,  that  he  was  the  '  first  who  opened  the 
gates  of  the  East,  unsealed  the  Word  of  God,  and 
unveiled  the  sanctuary  of  Hebrew  wisdom.'  " 
(This  sentence  is  quoted  from  the  Introduction  to 
Mr.  Francis  Griffin  Stokes'  admirable  Latin  and 
English  edition  of  the  Letters,  to  which  I  cordially 
commend  my  readers.)  Pfefferkorn  rallied  to  his 
side  the  whole  force  of  the  Dominican  organiza- 
tion. The  issue  was  long  uncertain. 

Ill 


BY-PATHS  IN  HEBRAIC  BOOKLAND 

Truth  is  usually  unable  to  meet  falsehood  on 
equal  terms ;  the  genuine,  for  the  most  part,  cannot 
soil  its  hands  with  the  foul  ammunition  of  impos- 
ture. Sometimes,  however,  truth  is  less  squeamish. 
And  so,  when  Pfefferkorn  was  engaged  in  slinging 
slime  at  Reuchlin,  there  was  suddenly  hurled  at  his 
own  person  an  avalanche  of  mud,  under  which  he 
and  his  party  sank  buried  from  heel  to  head.  The 
Letters  are  remorseless  in  their  personalities.  But 
if  it  be  impossible  to  deny  their  cruelty  and  even 
their  occasional  coarseness,  yet  their  fame  depends 
less  on  these  scurrilous  incidentals  than  on  the  essen- 
tial truth  on  which  they  are  based. 

It  is  the  highest  merit  of  satire  that  it  shall  not 
be  too  obvious.  Many  who  read  Gulliver's  Travels 
enjoy  it  as  a  tale,  and  may  not  even  realize  that 
Swift  was  lampooning  the  society  and  institutions 
of  his  day.  So  long  as  this  element  in  satire  is  not 
too  subtle,  it  adds  enormously  to  the  merit  of  the 
performance.  One  recalls  such  stories  as  the 
Descent  of  Man,  by  Edith  Wharton.  The  hero 
of  that  tale  is  an  eminent  zoologist,  who  is  moved 
by  the  popularity  of  pseudo-scientific  defences  of 
religion  to  publish  an  elaborate  skit.  But  he  is 
so  successful  in  concealing  his  object,  that  his 
'  Vital  Thing  "  is  mistaken  for  a  supreme  example 

112 


"  LETTERS  OF  OBSCURE  MEN  " 

of  the  very  type  of  work  he  is  lashing.  The  Letters 
of  Obscure  Men  avoided  this  danger.  They  hit 
the  happy  mean.  They  purported  to  be  written  by 
one  obscurantist  to  another,  and  while  the  educated 
at  once  saw  through  the  dodge,  the  illiterate  (in- 
cluding Pfefferkorn  himself)  took  them  seriously. 
Within  a  few  months  of  the  appearance  of  the  first 
series  of  the  Letters,  Sir  Thomas  More  (in  1616) 
wrote  to  Erasmus:  "  It  does  one's  heart  good  to 
see  how  delighted  everybody  is  with  the  '  Epistolae 
Obscurorum  Virorum  ' ;  the  learned  are  tickled  by 
their  humor,  while  the  unlearned  deem  their  teach- 
ings of  serious  worth."  The  foes  of  humanism — 
the  new  learning — are  left  to  expose  themselves,  in 
the  confidential  correspondence  which  members  of 
the  gang  are  made  to  carry  on  in  the  most  excruci- 
atingly funny  dog-Latin.  As  Bishop  Creighton 
put  it,  they  are  made  to  "  tell  their  own  story, 
to  wander  round  the  narrow  circle  of  antiquated 
prejudices  which  they  mistook  for  ideas,  display 
their  grossness,  their  vulgarity,  their  absence  of 
aim,  their  laborious  indolence,  their  lives  unrelieved 
by  any  touch  of  nobility."  No  wonder  Europe 
laughed,  as  it  did  in  the  following  century  at  the 
self-revelation  of  obscuranists  in  Pascal's  Provin- 
cial Letters ,  obviously  inspired  by  the  work  before 
s  113 


BY-PATHS  IN  HEBRAIC  BOOKLAND 

us.  (Compare  Stokes,  Epistolae,  etc.,  pp.  xlvi, 
xlix).  It  is  not  the  least  amusing  feature  in  the 
comedy  that  Richard  Steele  actually  regarded  the 
Letters  of  Obscure  Men  as  the  correspondence  be- 
tween "  some  profound  blockheads  "  who  wrote 
"  in  honor  of  each  other,  and  for  their  mutual  in- 
formation in  each  other's  absurdities."  (Stokes, 
p.  viii). 

This  fate — of  being  taken  seriously — befell,  in  a 
particularly  amusing  way,  what  is  perhaps  the  most 
amusing  of  all  the  Letters.  1  refer  to  the  second 
epistle  in  the  first  series.  "  Magister  Johannes 
Pelzer  "  sends  his  greeting  to  "  Magister  Ortwin 
Gratius,"  and  asks  help  on  a  matter  which  gives 
him  "  great  searchings  of  heart."  He  tells  Ortwin 
how,  being  lately  at  a  Frankfort  fair,  he  took  off  his 
cap  and  saluted  two  men,  who  seemed  reputable 
and  looked  like  Doctors  of  Divinity.  But  his  com- 
panion then  nudged  him  and  cried:  "  God-a-mercy, 
what  doest  thou?  Those  fellows  are  Jews." 
Magister  Pelzer  goes  on  to  argue  with  delicious 
seriousness  as  to  the  nature  of  his  sin,  and  begs  his 
correspondent's  help  to  decide  whether  it  was 
"  mortal  or  venial,  episcopal  or  papal."  Now  when 
Schudt  came  to  compile  his  farrago  of  attacks  on 
the  Jews,  he  actually  included  this  Frankfort  inci- 

114 


"LETTERS  OF  OBSCURE  MEN" 

dent  as  an  authentic  example  of  "  Jewish  inso- 
lence." It  was  indeed  painful  for  such  as  Schudt 
to  be  unable  to  discern  any  difference  between  a  Jew 
and  a  gentleman. 

How  the  authors  of  the  Letters  would  have 
chuckled  over  Steele  and  Schudt!  Reuchlin  had 
struck  a  decisive  blow  in  behalf  of  the  Jewish  con- 
tribution to  European  culture.  The  Letters  drove 
the  blow  home.  But,  after  all,  the  fools  were  not 
permanently  suppressed.  No,  ridicule  rarely  slays 
folly  outright.  It  scotches  the  snake,  and  then  in  a 
favorable  environment  the  reptile  revives.  Just 
as  folly  is  perennial,  so  should  the  lash  be  kept  in 
constant  repair.  Anti-Semitism  ought  not  to  be 
allowed  to  go  on  its  way  in  our  age  unscathed  by 
ridicule.  We  badly  need  a  new  Ulrich  von  Hutten 
to  give  us  a  modern  series  of  Letters  of  Obscure 
Men. 


115 


DE  ROSSI'S  "  LIGHT  OF  THE  EYES  " 

Towards  dusk,  on  a  mid-November  Friday  in 
the  year  1570,  Azariah  de  Rossi  descended  from 
his  own  apartments  to  those  of  his  married  daugh- 
ter. It  was  in  Ferrara,  and  for  some  hours  past 
earth-tremblings  had  made  people  anxious.  Within 
an  hour  of  his  lucky  visit  to  his  child  De  Rossi's 
abode  was  wrecked. 

To  this  earthquake,  as  Zunz  suggested  in  1841 
(Kerem  Hemed,  vol.  v,  p.  135),  we  owe  the  first 
attempt  by  a  Jew  to  investigate  critically,  and  with 
the  aid  of  secular  research,  the  history  of  Jewish 
literature.  De  Rossi  had  a  fine  command  of  Latin, 
and  though  he  was  less  at  home  with  Greek,  he  had 
a  good  working  knowledge  of  it.  After  the  earth- 
quake, he  left  his  home,  and  took  refuge  in  a  village 
south  of  the  Po.  A  Christian  scholar,  a  neighbor 
in  the  new  settlement,  was  diverting  his  rnind  from 
the  recent  disturbing  calamities,  by  perusing  the 
Letter  of  Aristeas.  There  is  a  rare  charm  in  the 
scene  that  followed.  Finding  some  difficulties  in 
the  Letter,  the  Christian  turned  to  the  Jew,  sug- 
gesting that  they  should  consult  the  Hebrew  text. 

116 


DE  ROSSI'S  "  LIGHT  OF  THE  EYES  " 

But  De  Rossi  was,  to  his  chagrin,  compelled  to  ad- 
mit that  there  was  no  Hebrew  text !  Such  a  lament- 
able deficiency  need  not,  however,  continue.  In 
less  than  three  weeks  De  Rossi  had  translated  the 
Letter  into  Hebrew,  and  with  that  act  the  modern 
study  of  Jewish  records  by  Jews  opens. 

Chroniclers  were  once  upon  a  time  fond  of  con- 
trasting the  physique  and  the  intellect  of  the 
worthies  of  former  ages.  Those  were  the  days, 
one  might  almost  say,  of  "  kakogenics,"  if  our  own 
is  the  era  of  eugenics.  So  we  read  of  De  Rossi  that 
though  "  well-born  "  by  ancestry,  he  was  "  ill- 
born  "  in  person.  Graetz  somewhat  overcolors  the 
record  when  he  writes  of  De  Rossi  thus :  "  Feeble, 
yellow,  withered,  and  afflicted  with  fever,  he  crept 
about  like  a  dying  man."  At  all  events,  he  was 
thin  and  short,  and  neglectful  of  his  bodily  health. 
Yet  he  was  not  quite  the  weakling  Graetz  presents, 
for  he  lived  to  the  age  of  sixty- four  (1514-1578). 
Moreover,  he  assures  us,  giving  full  details  of  the 
diet  and  treatment,  that  he  was  thoroughly  cured 
of  the  malaria,  of  the  ravages  of  which  Italian 
Jews  so  frequently  complain.  As  to  his  "  family," 
that  was  old  enough.  The  legend  ran  that  four  of 
the  families  settled  by  Titus  in  Rome  survived  into 
the  Middle  Ages ;  the  stock  of  the  De  Rossis 

117 


BY-PATHS  IN  HEBRAIC  BOOKLAND 

(min  ha-adummim)  belonged  to  one  of  the  famous 
quartette.  The  other  three  were  the  Mansi, 
de  Pomis,  and  Adolescentoli  groups. 

This  was  the  man  who  created  modern  Jewish 
"  science  " — to  use  the  term  so  beloved  of  our 
Continental  brethren.  De  Rossi's  great  work  ap- 
peared as  a  quarto  in  November,  1573  (some  date 
it  1574).  It  was  well  printed  in  the  pretty  square 
Hebrew  type  for  which  Mantua  is  famous.  The 
author  called  it  Meor  'Enayim,  that  is,  "  Light  of 
the  Eyes."  It  was,  indeed,  an  illuminant.  Graetz 
summarily  asserts  that  "  the  actual  results  of  this 
historical  investigation,  for  the  most  part,  have 
proved  unsound."  Assuredly  many  of  De  Rossi's 
statements  are  no  longer  accepted.  He  was  the 
father  of  criticism,  yet  he  was  often  himself  un- 
critical. In  his  chapter  on  the  antiquity  of  the 
Hebrew  language,  for  instance,  he  remarks:  "  I 
have  seen  among  many  ancient  coins,  belonging  to 
David  Finzi  of  Mantua,  a  silver  coin  on  which,  on 
the  obverse,  is  a  man's  head  round  which  is  in- 
scribed '  King  Solomon  '  in  Hebrew  square  letters, 
while  the  reverse  bears  a  figure  of  the  temple  with 
the  Hebrew  legend  *  Temple  of  Solomon.'  "  As 
Zunz  observes,  this  coin  must  have  been  a  modern 
fabrication.  In  many  other  points  De  Rossi  erred. 

118 


DE  ROSSI'S  "  LIGHT  OF  THE  EYES  " 

But  some  of  the  "  mistakes  "  for  which  he  is  blamed 
are  not  his  but  his  critics'.  Zunz,  like  Graetz,  had 
little  patience  with  the  Zohar.  The  literature  of 
the  Kabbalah  was  to  both  these  great  scholars 
"  false  and  corrupt."  At  this  date  we  are  much 
more  inclined  to  treat  the  Kabbalah  with  respect. 
De  Rossi  has  been  justified  by  later  research. 
Then,  again,  Zunz  categorically  includes  among 
De  Rossi's  blunders  his  acceptance  of  the  Letter  of 
Aristeas  as  genuine.  But  in  the  year  1904  Mr.  H. 
St.  J.  Thackeray,  in  the  preface  to  his  new  English 
translation  of  the  Letter,  asserts  "  recent  criticism 
has  set  in  the  direction  of  rehabilitating  the  story, 
or  at  any  rate  part  of  it."  Here,  one  can  have  no 
hesitation  in  claiming,  De  Rossi  was  right,  and  his 
critics  wrong. 

It  is  pleasing  to  be  able  to  make  this  last  asser- 
tion. The  Letter  of  Aristeas  purports  to  tell  the 
story  how  the  Greek  translation  of  the  Pentateuch 
was  made  in  Alexandria.  We  are  not  now  con- 
cerned with  the  story  itself.  But,  as  we  have  al- 
ready seen,  it  was  this  Letter  which  induced 
De  Rossi  to  write  his  book.  The  book,  after  a 
short  section  on  the  Ferrara  earthquake,  in  which 
the  author  collects  much  Jewish  and  non-Jewish 
seismological  lore,  goes  straight  to  Aristeas.  Now, 

119 


BY-PATHS  IN  HEBRAIC  BOOKLAND 

it  would  be  a  somewhat  unfortunate  fact  if  Jewish 
criticism  began  with  the  acceptance  of  a  forgery,  if 
the  father  of  all  our  modern  scholars  (including 
Zunz  himself)  had  started  off  with  a  bad  critical 
mistake.  We  are  spared  this  anomaly,  for  though 
Aristeas  may  not  be  as  old  as  it  claims  (the  third 
century  B.  C.  E.),  it  is  demonstrably  older  than 
its  assailants  made  it  out  to  be.  De  Rossi  is  far 
nearer  the  truth  than  Graetz.  Of  course,  we  do 
not  now  turn  to  De  Rossi  for  our  critical  nourish- 
ment. Though  editions  of  the  Meor  'Enayim 
continued  to  appear  as  late  as  1866  (in  fact  one  of 
the  author's  books  appeared  for  the  first  time  in 
London  in  1854),  his  works  are  substantially  obso- 
lete. For  this  reason  I  am  not  attempting  any  close 
account  of  their  contents. 

But  while  it  is  antiquated  in  this  sense,  it  is  a 
book  of  the  class  that  can  never  become  unimpor- 
tant. For  let  us  realize  what  De  Rossi  accom- 
plished. In  the  first  place  he  directed  Jewish 
attention  to  the  Jewish  literature  preserved  or  writ- 
ten in  Greek.  He  re-introduced  Philo  to  Jewish 
notice;  not  very  accurately,  it  is  true,  yet  he  did 
re-introduce  him.  Secondly,  he  showed  how  much 
was  to  be  derived  from  a  study  of  non-Jewish 
sources.  No  one,  after  De  Rossi,  has  for  a  moment 

120 


DE  ROSSI'S  "  LIGHT  OF  THE  EYES  " 

thought  it  possible  to  deal  with  Jewish  history 
entirely  from  Jewish  records.  Every  available 
material  must  be  drawn  on  if  we  are  to  construct 
a  sound  edifice.  It  is  a  just  verdict  of  Graetz's  that 
De  Rossi's  "  power  of  reconstruction  was  small." 
But  he  showed  subsequent  generations  how  to  build. 
De  Rossi,  finally,  was  not  one  who  regarded  Jewish 
literature  merely  as  the  subject  matter  for  research. 
He  was  intensely  interested  in  it  for  its  own  sake. 
He  was  a  poet  as  well  as  a  historian.  And  this  he 
shows  both  by  his  whole  style  and  outlook  as  well 
as  by  the  Hebrew  and  Italian  verses  that  he  wrote. 
He  was,  indeed,  known  both  as  Azariah  and  as 
Bonajuto,  the  latter  being  the  Italian  equivalent. 
X-et  us  end  with  this  fact:  the  same  man,  who  in- 
augurated modern  Jewish  criticism,  added  some 
notable  hymns  to  tije  synagogue  prayer-book. 


121 


GUARINI  AND  LUZZATTO 

An  aristocrat  all  his  life,  Guarini  was  out  of 
place  in  the  court  life  of  Ferrara.  He  spent  his 
vigor  in  a  vain  attempt  to  accommodate  himself 
to  the  sixteenth  century  Italian  conditions.  Then, 
broken  in  strength  and  fortune,  he  retired  to  pro- 
duce his  dramatic  masterpiece.  Not  that  the  Pastor 
Fido  can  be  truly  termed  dramatic.  It  is  much 
more  of  a  lyric.  But  just  as  Banquo,  himself  no 
king,  was  the  father  of  kings,  so  Guarini,  of  little 
consequence  as  a  dramatist,  begot  famous  dramas. 
For  the  Faithful  Shepherd  deeply  influenced  Euro- 
pean drama  throughout  the  two  centuries  which 
followed  its  publication  in  1590. 

The  Hebraic  muse  owed  much  to  Guarini. 
Moses  Hayyim  Luzzatto  (1707-1747)  has  been 
the  only  writer  of  Hebrew  plays  whose  work  counts 
in  the  literary  sense.  Luzzatto  derived  his  whole 
dramatic  inspiration  from  Guarini.  Let  no  one 
question  this  assertion  without  first  comparing 
La-Yesharim  Tehillah  and  Migdal  'Oz  with  the 
Pastor  Fido.  The  characters  and  scenes,  and  even 
more,  the  style,  are  closely  alike.  Nor  is  this  latter 

122 


GUARINI  AND  LUZZATTO 

fact  wonderful.  John  Addington  Symonds  de- 
scribes Guarini's  work  as  "  a  masterpiece  of  dic- 
tion, glittering  and  faultless,  like  a  bas-relief  of 
hard  Corinthian  bronze."  Luzzatto  produces  the 
same  effect  in  his  Hebrew  imitation,  using  a  similar 
metre  as  well  as  similar  dramatic  conventions.  In 
imitating,  however,  he  re-interprets.  Guarini's 
play  is  sometimes  gross,  it  is  never  truly  rustic. 
But  a  Hebrew  poet,  moved  by  such  models  as  the 
Song  of  Songs,  better  knew  how  to  be  sensuous 
with  purity;  grossness  must  be  anti-pathetic  to  him. 
On  the  other  hand,  Hebrew  poetry  is  genuinely 
rustic.  The  biblical  shepherd,  whether  in  scrip- 
tural history  or  romance,  is  the  most  beloved  of 
heroes.  Some  of  the  great  characters  of  the  Bible 
are  shepherds:  Abraham,  Moses,  David,  Amos, 
Shulammith — but  why  pile  up  instances?  It  is 
obvious  that  a  Hebrew  poet,  adopting  a  rural 
background  for  a  lyrical  drama,  must  inevitably 
write  with  sincerity.  He  could  not,  at  the  same 
time,  fail  to  write  with  delicacy.  Luzzatto  took 
much  from  Guarini,  but  he  both  refined  and 
adorned  what  he  borrowed. 

Yet,  though  it  is  because  of  Luzzatto  that  I  am 
writing  of  Guarini,  nevertheless,  Guarini,  and  not 
Luzzatto,  is  my  present  subject.  So  I  will  re-tell 

123 


BY-PATHS  IN  HEBRAIC  BOOKLAND 

for  the  reader  the  story  of  the  Pastor  Fido.  Not 
that  it  is  an  easy  task.  Guarini,  who  influenced  the 
late  Elizabethans,  shared,  with  the  best  of  the  lat- 
ter, the  inordinate  fancy  for  complicated  plots. 
Plot  is  entangled  within  plot,  until  we  lose  sight  of 
the  main  theme.  Luzzatto — I  find  it  impossible  to 
keep  the  Hebrew  out ! — here  simplifies.  He  hardly 
gives  us  a  story  at  all;  he  provides  an  allegory, 
eking  out  Guarini  with  Midrash.  In  the  process  of 
disentangling  Guarini's  intricacies,  he  somewhat 
sacrifices  the  chief  merit  of  his  Italian  model. 
Luzzatto's  dramatis  personae  are  almost  abstrac- 
tions; they  remind  us  of  the  figures  in  morality 
plays.  A  Luzzatto  drama  more  resembles  Every- 
man than  it  does  As  You  Like  it.  Of  Guarini,  on 
the  other  hand,  it  may  be  said,  that  though  he  means 
his  characters  to  represent  types,  he  draws  them  as 
individuals.  Silvio,  to  adopt  Mr.  Symond's  sum- 
maries, is  "  cold  and  eager  " ;  Mirtillo  "  tender 
and  romantic."  Corisca's  "  meretricious  arts  "  con- 
trast with  and  enhance  Amarillis's  "  pure  affec- 
tion"; Dorinda  is  "shameless."  The  dramatist, 
however,  be  he  Luzzatto  or  Guarini,  writes  with  a 
distinct  tendency.  His  aim  is  to  set  up  the  country 
life  and  the  country  girl  as  essentially  superior  to 
the  city  varieties.  This  motive  is  as  old  as  satire, 

124 


GUARINI  AND  LUZZATTO 

and  as  young  as  the  "  verses  of  society."  Austin 
Dobson's  Phyllida  is  all  that  is  sweet  and  natural, 
she  is  a  foil  to  the  artificiality  of  the  "  ladies  of 
St.  James's."  Guarini  enjoys  the  honor  not  of 
creating  the  mood,  but  of  bringing  it  into  new 
vogue. 

But  I  am  still  keeping  from  the  story.  The 
scene  is  Arcadia.  Yearly  the  inhabitants  must 
sacrifice  a  young  maiden  to  Diana.  Diana  had  suf- 
fered through  the  perfidy  of  Lucrina;  but  the 
Oracle  declares : 

Your  Woes,  Arcadians!  never  shall  have  End, 
Till  Love  shall  two  conjoin  of  heavenly  Race, 

And  till  a  faithful  Shepherd  shall  amend, 
By  matchless  Zeal,  Lucrina's  old  Disgrace. 

Montano,  the  priest  of  Diana,  seeks,  therefore, 
to  join  in  marriage  his  only  son,  Silvio,  to  the  noble 
nymph,  Amarillis,  descended  from  Pan.  But 
Silvio  thought  more  of  hunting  than  of  love.  The 
young  shepherd,  Mirtillo,  becomes  enamored  of 
Amarillis,  and  she  of  him.  The  artful  Corisca, 
desiring  the  shepherd  for  herself,  charges  Amarillis 
with  infidelity — she  is  betrothed,  though  not 
wedded,  to  Silvio.  Amarillis  is  sentenced  to  death. 
Mirtillo  offers  himself,  and  is  accepted,  as  her  sub- 
stitute. Led  to  the — fatal,  not  the  bridal — altar, 

125 


BY-PATHS  IN  HEBRAIC  BOOKLAND 

Mirtillo's  identity  is  discovered.  The  shepherd  is 
Montano's  son.  Let  us  read  the  rest  in  the  terms 
of  the  "  argument  "  (as  given  in  the  1782  English 
version)  :  "  On  which  Occasion,  the  true  Father, 
bewailing  that  it  should  fall  to  his  lot  to  execute  the 
law  on  his  own  blood — (for  to  Montano,  as  priest, 
the  office  of  carrying  out  the  sacrificial  rite  be- 
longed)— is  by  Tirenio,  a  blind  soothsayer,  clearly 
satisfied  by  the  interpretation  of  the  Oracle  itself, 
that  it  was  not  only  opposite  to  the  will  of  the  gods 
that  this  victim  should  be  sacrificed,  but  moveover 
that  the  happy  period  (i.  <?.,  end)  was  now  come  to 
the  woes  of  Arcadia,  which  had  been  predicted  by 
the  sacred  Voice,  and  from  which,  as  every  cir- 
cumstance now  strongly  corresponded,  they  con- 
cluded that  Amarillis  could  not  be,  nor  ought  to  be, 
the  spouse  of  any  other  than  Mirtillo.  And  as  a 
little  previous  to  this,  Silvio,  thinking  to  wound  a 
wild  beast,  had  pierced  Dorinda,  who  had  been  ex- 
ceedingly distressed  by  the  slight  he  had  shown  to 
her  violent  passion  for  him,  but  whose  wonted 
savageness  was  changed  by  this  accident  and  soft- 
ened into  compassion — after  her  wound  was 
healed,  which  at  first  was  thought  mortal,  and  after 
Amarillis  was  become  the  spouse  of  Mirtillo,  he 
too  became  now  enamoured  of  Dorinda,  and  mar- 


GUARINI  AND  LUZZATTO 

ried  her;  by  means  of  these  events,  so  happy  and  so 
extraordinary,  Corisca  is  at  length  convinced  of  and 
confesses  her  guilt,  and,  having  implored  pardon 
and  obtained  it  from  the  loving  couple,  her  per- 
turbed spirit  now  pacified  and  satiated  with  the 
Follies  of  the  World,  she  determines  to  change  her 
Course  of  Life."  The  play  ends  with  the  wedding 
chorus  for  the  hero  and  heroine  (Luzzatto,  too, 
wrote  his  plays  for  marriage  celebrations).  In 
words  very  like  those  used  by  Luzzatto,  Guarini's 
shepherds  sing  to  Mirtillo  and  Amarillis : 

O  happy  pair! 

Who  have  in  Sorrow  sown,  and  reap'd  in  Joy, 

How  hath  your  bitter  share  of  grief's  alloy 

Now  sweetened  and  confirmed  your  present  bliss ! 

And  may  ye  learn  from  this, 

Blind,  feeble  mortals!  to  distinguish  right 

What  are  true  ills,  and  what  is  pure  delight — 

Not  all  that  pleases  is  substantial  good; 

Not  all  which  grieves,  true  ill,  well  understood — 

That,  of  all  joys,  must  be  pronounced  the  best, 

Which  virtue's  arduous  triumphs  yield  the  breast. 

In  this  story  may  be  perceived  the  germs  both  of 
Fletcher's  Faithful  Shepherdess  and  of  Luzzatto's 
Unto  the  Upright  Praise.  But  while  the  former 
seized  upon  and  elaborated  the  sensuous  element 
in  Guarini's  plot,  giving  us  a  truly  disgusting  figure 

127 


BY-PATHS  IN  HEBRAIC  BOOKLAND 

in  Chloe,  Luzzatto  pounced  on  the  finer  aspects, 
and  his  heroines  outshine  even  Amarillis  in  purity 
and  beauty  of  mind,  just  as  his  heroes  surpass  Mir- 
tillo  in  fidelity  to  the  standards  of  manhood.  That 
one  and  the  same  model  should  have  produced  two 
such  varied  copies  says  much  for  the  genius  of  the 
original  author.  To  him,  it  is  true,  we  owe  the 
tragi-comedy  of  intrigue.  But  to  him  also  we  are 
indebted  for  idylls,  as  full-blooded  as  those  of 
Theocritus,  but  far  more  spiritual. 


128 


HAHN'S  NOTE  BOOK 

The  Hahn  family  came  to  Frankfort-on-the- 
Main  from  Nordlingen  (Bavaria),  whence  the 
Jews  were  expelled  in  1507.  Between  that  date 
and  1860  Nordlingen  could  not  boast  of  a  syna- 
gogue; such  Jews  as  visited  the  place  were  ad- 
mitted for  a  day  at  a  time  to  the  fairs,  or  were 
allowed  temporarily  to  reside  in  war  times.  In 
each  case  a  poll-tax  was  exacted  (see  Jewish  Ency- 
clopedia, vol.  ix,  p.  335 ) .  In  Frankfort,  the  family 
dwelt  in  a  house  bearing  the  sign  of  "  The  Red 
Cock"  (Zum  rothen  Hahn}.  Graetz  fully  de- 
scribes the  regulations  which  compelled  the  Jews  of 
Frankfort  to  fix  shields  with  various  devices  and 
names  on  their  houses.  He  cites  "  the  garlic," 
"  the  ass,"  "  green  shield,"  "  red  shield  "  (Roth- 
schild), "dragon."  The  Frankfort  Jews  were 
forced  to  name  themselves  after  these  shields. 
Hence,  in  the  Jewish  sources,  the  author  with  whom 
we  are  now  concerned  is  sometimes  called  Joseph 
Nordlinger,  from  his  original  home,  and  some- 
times Joseph  Hahn,  from  the  family  house-sign  in 
Frankfort. 

o  129 


BY-PATHS  IN  HEBRAIC  BOOKLAND 

He  himself  was  not  permitted  to  live  peaceably 
in  Frankfort.  Born  in  the  second  half  of  the  six- 
teenth century,  he  not  only  had  to  endure  the  piti- 
able restrictions  to  which  the  Jews  were  at  normal 
times  subjected,  but  he  suffered  in  1614  under  the 
Fettmilch  riot,  as  the  result  of  which,  after  many 
of  the  whole  Jewish  community  had  been  slain  and 
more  injured,  the  survivors  left  the  town.  In 
March,  1616,  the  Jews — Joseph  Hahn  among 
them — were  welcomed  back  amid  public  demon- 
strations of  good-will,  and  the  community  insti- 
tuted the  Frankfort  Purim  on  Adar  20,  the 
anniversary  of  the  return.  Though  the  trouble 
thus  ended  happily,  we  can  understand  how  inse- 
cure the  life  of  the  German  Jews  was  at  the  begin- 
ning of  the  seventeenth  century.  Hence  we  need 
not  be  surprised  to  find  in  Hahn's  book  Yosif  Omez 
(§  483)  a  form  of  dying  confession  drawn  up  in 
Frankfort  to  be  recited  by  those  undergoing  mar- 
tyrdom. It  is  a  moving  composition,  simple  in  its 
pathos,  yet  too  poignant  in  its  note  of  sorrow  to 
be  cited  here  in  full. 

Let  it  not  be  thought,  however,  that  the  book  is 
a  doleful  one.  Joseph  Hahn's  is  a  warm-hearted 
Judaism,  and  there  was  room  in  it  for  a  manifold 

130 


HAHN'S  NOTE  BOOK 

human  interest.  The  work,  in  a  sense,  is  learned, 
but  it  is  written  so  crisply  and  epigrammatically 
that  its  charm  surpasses  and  even  disguises  its  tech- 
nicalities. It  was  printed  in  1723,  but  was  written 
a  good  deal  earlier,  as  we  know  that  the  author 
died  in  1637.  I  have  alluded  to  the  manifold  in- 
terests which  occupied  Hahn's  mind.  Questions  of 
Jewish  law  and  fundamental  problems  of  morality 
are  considered;  but  so  are  matters  of  costume  and 
cookery.  How  to  wear  a  special  dress  for  syna- 
gogue and  how  to  keep  a  special  overcoat  for  the 
benediction  of  the  moon,  how  to  rub  off  ink-stains 
from  the  fingers  before  meals,  how  "  it  is  a  truer 
penance  to  eat  moderately  at  ordinary  meals  than 
to  endure  an  occasional  fast,"  how  the  children 
should  be  encouraged  to  read  good  books  at  table, 
and  how,  when  such  a  book  is  finished,  there  should 
be  a  jolly  siyyum — these  and  many  another  inter- 
esting view  crowd  Joseph  Hahn's  delightful  pages. 
He  enjoyed  a  cheerful  meal,  but  he  proceeds  to  de- 
nounce in  unmeasured  terms  those  who  ("  and 
there  are  many  such  in  our  times,"  he  adds)  sing 
love-songs  or  tell  indecent  stories  over  their  wine. 
"  Do  not  esteem  lightly,"  he  cautions  his  readers 
(§  J83),  "the  advice  of  our  sages,"  as  to  first 
putting  on  the  right  shoe  and  first  removing  the 

131 


BY-PATHS  IN  HEBRAIC  BOOKLAND 

left  Joseph  Hahn,  in  truth,  is  a  remarkable  mix- 
ture of  the  old  and  the  new ;  he  loves  old  customs, 
yet  constantly  praises  new  ones,  such  as  the  intro- 
duction of  Psalms  and  of  Lekah  Dodi  into  the 
Friday  night  service.  We  are  so  familiar  with  the 
hymn  "  Come,  O  friend,  to  meet  the  bride,"  that  it 
is  startling  to  be  reminded  that  it  dates  from  the 
sixteenth  century.  Joseph  Hahn  thoroughly  en- 
tered into  the  spirit  of  such  lively  processions  from 
place  to  place  as  accompanied  Lekah  Dodi,  though 
he  held  them  more  suitable  for  Palestine  than 
Germany.  He  detested  low  songs,  and  objected  to 
games  of  chance,  but  he  was  no  kill-joy.  Again 
and  again  he  refers  to  the  synagogue  tunes,  and 
revels  in  hazzanut.  His  was  a  thoroughly  Jewish 
synthesis  of  austerity  and  joviality. 

He  has  many  remarks  as  to  the  proper  treat- 
ment of  servants.  An  employer  shall  not  retain 
wages  in  trust  for  the  servant,  even  at  the  latter's 
desire.  He  must  first  pay  the  wages,  and  the  ser- 
vant may  then  ask  the  employer  to  save  it  (§  361 ) . 
He  had  a  very  loving  heart  as  well  as  a  just  mind. 
Delightful  is  his  custom  of  saying  Sheheheyanu 
on  seeing  a  friend  or  beloved  relative  after  an  in- 
terval of  thirty  days.  On  the  other  hand,  he,  with 
equal  gravity,  tells  us  (§455)  how  his  father, 

132 


HAHN'S  NOTE  BOOK 

when  he  left  the  city,  took  a  little  splinter  of  wood 
from  the  gate,  and  fixed  it  in  his  hat-band,  as  a 
specific  for  his  safety,  or  sure  return.  This  is  a 
wide-spread  custom.  The  whole  book  is  a  won- 
derful union  of  sound  sense  and  quaintness.  The 
author,  in  the  midst  of  deep  ritual  problems  and  of 
careful  philological  discussions  of  liturgical  points, 
will  turn  aside  to  warn  us  against  buying  the  Sab- 
bath fish  on  Thursday.  Fish,  he  says,  must  be 
fresh.  In  the  same  breath  he  has  this  fine  remark : 
'  What  you  eat  profits  the  body;  what  you  spare 
for  God  (that  is,  give  to  the  poor)  profits  the 
soul."  He  protests  (§  547)  against  permitting  the 
poor  to  go  round  to  beg  from  house  to  house; 
officials  must  be  appointed  to  carry  relief  to  the 
needy  in  their  homes.  But  do  not  forget  to  taste 
your  shalet  on  Friday  to  test  whether  it  be  properly 
cooked !  One  of  the  most  characteristically  Jew- 
ish features  of  life  under  the  traditional  regime 
was  the  man's  participation  in  the  kitchen  prepara- 
tions. But  Joseph  Hahn  takes  a  high  view  of  the 
woman's  part  in  the  moralization  of  the  domestic 
life.  Just  as  the  husband  was  not  excluded  from 
the  kitchen,  so  the  wife  was  not  limited  to  it.  Yet 
Hahn  would  not  allow  women  to  sing  the  Zemirot 
or  table  hymns. 

133 


BY-PATHS  IN  HEBRAIC  BOOKLAND 

I  have  said  that  our  author  loves  the  old,  yet  has 
no  objection  to  the  new.  The  latter  feature  is  ex- 
emplified by  a  long  song  on  the  Sabbath  Light,  com- 
posed by  Joseph  Hahn  for  Friday  nights.  Each 
verse  is  printed  in  Hebrew  (§  60 1 )  with  a  Yiddish 
paraphrase.  He  disliked  setting  the  Zemir&t  to 
non-Jewish  tunes.  There  is  no  sense,  he  adds,  in 
the  argument  of  those  who  urge  that  these  non- 
Jewish  tunes  were  stolen  from  the  temple  melo- 
dies !  The  children,  we  learn,  had  a  special  Sabbath 
cake.  A  Jewish  child,  he  relates  (§  612),  was 
carried  off  by  robbers,  but  cried  so  pitifully  for  his 
cake  on  Friday  night,  that  he  was  eventually  dis- 
covered by  Jews  and  ransomed.  He  protests 
against  the  "  modern  innovation  "  of  introducing 
a  sermon  in  the  morning  service;  this  compels  the 
old  and  ailing  to  wait  too  long  for  breakfast.  The 
sermon  must,  as  of  old,  be  given  after  the  meal 
( §  625 ).  Yet  he  did  not  mind  himself  introducing 
an  innovation,  for  he  instituted  a  simple  haggadic 
discourse  on  the  afternoons  of  festivals,  so  as  to 
attract  the  people  and  keep  them  from  frivolous 
amusements  (§821).  The  greater  Spinholz  on 
the  Saturday  before  a  wedding  was  still  customary 
in  the  author's  time.  He  complains  of  those  people 
who  drink  better  wine  on  Sundays  than  on  Satur- 

134 


HAHN'S  NOTE  BOOK 

days  (§  693).  He  objects  to  the  practice  of  the 
rich  to  have  their  daughters  taught  instrumental 
music  by  male  instructors  (§  890).  But  here  I 
must  break  off,  though  it  is  difficult  to  tear  oneself 
from  the  book,  even  the  narrowness  of  which  has  a 
historical  interest,  and  the  prejudices  of  which  en- 
tertain. As  a  whole,  it  represents  a  phase  of  Jewish 
life  which  belongs  to  the  past,  yet  there  runs 
through  it  a  vein  of  homely  sentiment  which  is 
found  also  in  our  present. 


135 


LEON  MODENA'S  "  RITES  " 

Said  to  have  been  composed  at  the  request  of  an 
English  nobleman  for  the  delectation  of  James  I, 
Leon  Modena's  account  of  Jewish  ceremonial  was 
certainly  intended  for  Christian  readers.  Though 
written  in  Italian,  it  first  appeared  in  France  (Paris, 
1637),  through  the  good  offices  of  the  author's 
pupil  and  friend,  J.  Gaffarel.  It  was  the  source  of 
a  whole  library  of  similar  books.  Not  only  was  it 
translated  into  several  languages,  but  onwards  from 
Modena's  time,  writers,  Jewish  and  Christian, 
competent  and  incompetent,  devoted  themselves  to 
the  task  of  presenting  to  the  world  in  general  the 
teachings  and  customs  of  Judaism.  The  recent 
treatise  of  Oesterley  and  Box  is  a  lineal  descendant 
of  Modena's  Rites. 

Of  the  author  it  may  be  said  that  he  was  the 
Admirable  Crichton  of  his  age  (1571-1648).  His 
range  of  knowledge  and  power  was  extraordinary. 
As  Dr.  Johnson  said  of  Oliver  Goldsmith,  he 
touched  nothing  which  he  did  not  adorn.  Besides 
writing  many  books  on  many  subjects,  he  filled  the 
office  of  Rabbi  at  Venice  with  distinction,  his  ser- 

136 


LEON  MODENA'S  "RITES" 

mons  in  Italian  attracting  large  audiences.  Some 
of  his  German  critics  call  him  "  characterless." 
Why?  Because  he  denounced  gambling,  and  yet 
was  a  life-long  victim  to  the  vice.  In  his  boyhood 
he  produced  a  pamphlet  against  card-playing,  and 
in  1631  successfully  protested  against  the  excom- 
munication of  card-players.  But  is  there  lack  of 
character  here  ?  Of  many  another  great  man  could 
it  be  said  that  he  saw  and  approved  the  better  yet 
followed  the  worse.  And  there  are  things  which 
one  dislikes  without  wishing  to  put  the  offenders 
under  a  ban.  On  another  occasion,  Modena 
severely  attacked  Rabbinism,  and  then  published  a 
reply  to  his  own  attack.  He  assuredly  was  not  the 
only  man  impelled  to  refute  his  own  arguments. 

Modena  was,  one  might  rather  say,  a  man  of 
moods,  and  therefore  of  singular  openness  and 
width  of  mind.  He  suffered  not  from  lack  of  char- 
acter, but  from  an  excess  of  impressionability.  A 
bee  has  not  less  character  than  a  caterpillar,  because 
the  former  flies  from  flower  to  flower,  while  the 
latter  adheres  to  the  same  cabbage  leaf.  Modena, 
to  put  the  case  in  yet  another  way,  lived  at  a  transi- 
tional period,  when  Jews  were  only  beginning  to 
acclimatize  themselves  to  modern  conditions,  and 
when  settled  views  on  many  subjects  were  not  only 

137 


BY-PATHS  IN  HEBRAIC  BOOKLAND 

difficult  but  undesirable.  Despite  his  vagaries,  one 
is  rather  attracted  to  him.  There  must  have  been 
solidity  as  well  as  versatility  in  his  disposition,  or  he 
could  not  possibly  have  retained  the  important  rab- 
binic post  he  filled  for  more  than  half-a-century. 
Probably  the  secret  was  that  he  not  only  possessed 
personal  charm,  but  the  real  man  was  best  known 
to  those  who  knew  him  best.  They — or  many  of 
them — assuredly  admired  and  loved  him. 

We  will  now  turn  to  another  figure — the  first 
English  translator  of  Modena's  Riti  Ebraici.  This 
was  Edmund  Chilmead,  who  was  born  in  1610  and 
died  in  1654.  He  was  a  good  scholar  and  an  ac- 
complished musician.  Up  to  1648  he  resided  in 
Oxford,  but  as  a  result  of  the  troubles  between 
Charles  I  and  the  Parliament,  he  was  expelled  from 
the  University  because  of  his  royalist  opinions. 
Two  things,  however,  speak  well  for  Cromwell's 
toleration.  Chilmead  was  not  only  allowed  to  live 
unmolested  in  London  to  the  day  of  his  death,  but 
had  no  hesitation,  on  the  title-page  of  his  transla- 
tion of  Modena,  to  describe  himself  still  as  "  Chap- 
lain of  Christ  Church,  Oxon."  The  date  of  the 
translation  gives  the  clue.  "  The  History  of  the 
Rites,  Customes,  and  Manner  of  Life  of  the  Pres- 
ent Jews  throughout  the  World  "  was  printed  "  for 

138 


LEON  MODENA'S  "RITES" 

Jo.  Martin  and  Jo.  Ridley,  at  the  Castle  in  Fleet 
Street,  by  Ram  Alley"  in  1650.  By  that  time 
Cromwell  was  probably  thinking  of  the  Jewish 
question,  and  he  must  have  welcomed  this  first-hand 
statement  on  the  Jewish  religion.  Chilmead's  edi- 
tion, one  must  confess,  is  badly  printed,  and  is  not 
very  creditable  to  the  printing  capacity  of  the 
"  Castle  in  Fleet  Street."  One  might  pardon  the 
many  misprints  in  the  Hebrew,  but  it  is  hard  to 
overlook  the  numerous  faults  in  the  English.  It  is 
not  wonderful  that,  in  the  following  century,  Ock- 
ley  thought  it  necessary  to  issue  a  new  version. 

Modena's  own  original  was  not,  as  the  title  sug- 
gests, a  history.  It  does  not  so  much  give  sources 
as  facts.  But  this  circumstance,  that  it  is  mainly 
descriptive,  confers  on  it  a  permanent  value.  For 
it  thus  becomes  a  document.  It  helps  us  to  realize 
several  aspects  of  the  Jewish  position  at  the  begin- 
ning of  the  seventeenth  century.  The  author  uses 
the  term  history  in  the  sense  of  narrative;  as  he 
states  in  his  Prefatory  Epistle,  he  is  concerned  with 
the  what  and  not  with  the  why  ("  Quod  sunt,"  not 
"  Propter  quod  sunt,"  as  he  expresses  it).  He 
deals  with  his  present,  not  with  the  past,  and  for 
that  very  limitation  we  may  be  grateful.  He 
claims,  too,  that  he  is  a  "  Relater,"  not  a  "  De- 

139 


BY-PATHS  IN  HEBRAIC  BOOKLAND 

fender."  That  being  so,  it  is  of  peculiar  interest 
to  find  what  we  do  in  his  work,  arranged  in  five 
books,  "  according  to  the  number  of  the  Books  of 
the  Law." 

Several  forms  of  prayer  appear  for  the  first  time 
in  his  pages.  Certainly  Chilmead  is  the  earliest  to 
give  us  in  English  the  Prayer  for  the  Government, 
or  a  translation  of  the  Thirteen  Articles  drawn  up 
by  Maimonides.  Modena,  again,  tells  us  that  in 
his  day  it  was  customary  to  "  leave  about  a  yard 
square  of  the  wall  of  the  house  unplaistered  on 
which  they  write  either  the  verse  of  Psalm  137,  '  If 
I  forget  thee,  O  Jerusalem,'  or  the  words  Zecher 
Lahorban — a  Memorial  of  the  Desolation."  He 
knows  only  wooden  Mezuzahs.  Jews  in  Italy  have 
pictures  and  images  in  their  houses,  "  especially  if 
they  be  not  with  Relief,  or  Imbossed  work,  nor  the 
Bodies  at  large."  Few,  he  reports,  take  heed  to 
the  custom  of  placing  the  beds  north  and  south; 
many  attach  significance  to  dreams.  Jewish  men 
never  paint  their  faces,  for  the  custom  is  "  effemi- 
nate " ;  and  "  in  whatsoever  country  they  are,  they 
(the  men)  usually  affect  the  long  garment,  or 
Gown."  The  women  dress  "  in  the  habite  of  the 
countries  where  they  inhabite  ";  but  after  marriage 
wear  a  perruke  to  cover  their  natural  hair.  The 

140 


LEON  MODENA'S  "RITES" 

Jews  build  their  synagogues  wherever  they  can, 
"  it  being  impossible  for  them  now  to  erect  any 
statelie  or  sumptuous  Fabricks."  Things,  as  we 
know,  soon  after  Modena's  time  became  different, 
for  by  the  middle  of  the  seventeenth  century,  sev- 
eral fine  synagogues  were  built  in  Rome  and  else- 
where. The  women  "  see  whatever  is  done  in  the 
School  (thus  Chilmead  renders  scuola  or  syna- 
gogue), though  they  are  themselves  unseen  of  any 
man."  In  the  same  city  there  will  be  places  of 
worship  "  according  to  the  different  customes  of 
the  Levantines,  Dutch  (German),  and  Italians." 
Then,  "  in  their  singing,  the  Dutch  far  exceed  all 
the  rest:  the  Levantines  and  Spaniards  use  a  cer- 
tain singing  tone,  much  after  the  Turkish  manner; 
and  the  Italians  affect  a  more  plain,  and  quiet  way 
in  their  devotions."  The  "  Favours  "  of  "  having 
a  hand  "  in  the  acts  connected  with  the  reading  of 
the  Law  "  are  bought  of  the  Chaunter,  and  he  that 
biddeth  most,  shall  have  a  share  in  them." 

Willingly,  did  space  permit,  we  would  follow  the 
author  through  his  account  of  the  Judaism  of  his 
time.  The  majority  of  Jews,  he  says,  are  poor,  yet 
annually  they  send  "  Almes  to  Jerusalem,  Safed, 
Tiberias,  and  Hebron."  The  Jews  never  "  tor- 
ment, or  abuse,  or  put  to  any  cruel  death,  any  Brute 

141 


BY-PATHS  IN  HEBRAIC  BOOKLAND 

Beast"  Very  few  Jews  are  able  to  speak  Hebrew ; 
all  learn  the  language  of  the  countries  where  they 
are  born.  "  Onely  those  of  the  Morea  still  retain 
the  Hebrew  Tongue  also,  and  use  it  in  their  Famil- 
iar Letters."  In  Italy,  he  records,  the  Talmud 
"  continues  utterly  prohibited,"  and  copies  are  not 
to  be  found  in  the  country.  Jews  do  not  regard 
"  Vowes  "  as  "commendable";  yet  "when  they 
are  made,  they  ought  to  be  kept."  Not  many  now 
observe  the  "  tradition  "  against  eating  "  Fish  and 
Flesh  together."  He  tells  us  of  an  arrangement 
by  which,  for  the  Sabbath,  some  "  so  ordered  the 
matter  aforehand,  that  the  Fire  should  kindle  itself 
at  such  and  such  a  time."  The  Passover  bread  is 
made  in  "  flat  cakes  of  divers  forms  and  shapes." 
The  "  Ceremonie  with  a  Cock,"  on  the  eve  of  the 
Day  of  Atonement,  "  is  now  left  off  both  in  the 
East  and  in  Italy,  as  being  a  thing  both  Supersti- 
tious and  Groundlesse."  But  they  still,  on  Purim, 
"  as  often  as  they  hear  Haman  named,  beat  the 
ground,  and  make  a  great  murmuring  noise." 
Bigamy  "  is  seldome  or  never  used."  Marriages 
are  usually  performed  before  full  moon,  and  the 
favorite  days  are  Wednesdays  and  Fridays,  with 
Thursdays  for  widows.  "  Little  boyes,  with  lighted 
torches  in  their  hands,"  sing  before  the  bridal 

142 


LEON  MODENA'S  "RITES" 

couple,  who  are  seated  under  the  canopy.  The 
Ketubah  is  read  at  the  marriage.  Modena  men- 
tions the  charms  against  Lilit,  and  name-changing 
in  case  of  sickness.  He  describes  how,  in  Ger- 
many, in  the  case  of  girls,  "  the  Chaunter  goeth 
home  to  the  Parents  house,  and  lifting  the  child's 
cradle  on  high,  he  blesseth  it,  and  so  giveth  it  the 
Name."  Modena  also  informs  us  that  the  Kara- 
ites were,  in  his  time,  numerous  in  Constantinople, 
Cairo,  and  Russia. 

Modena  records  that  among  the  Jews  "  there 
are  many  women  that  are  much  more  devout  and 
pious  than  the  men,  and  who  not  only  endeavour  to 
bring  up  their  children  in  all  manner  of  Vertuous 
Education;  but  are  a  means  also  of  restraining  their 
husbands  from  their  Vitious  Courses,  they  would 
otherwise  take,  and  of  inclining  them  to  a  more 
Godly  way  of  Life."  With  which  handsome  and 
just  compliment  we  will  take  leave  of  our  author. 


143 


PART  III 


10 


PART  III 

MENASSEH  AND  REMBRANDT 

On  April  25,  1655,  six  months  before  starting 
on  his  mission  to  Cromwell,  Menasseh  ben  Israel — 
visionary  about  to  play  the  role  of  statesman — com- 
pleted in  Amsterdam  the  Spanish  book  which  forms 
the  subject  of  this  paper.  Duodecimo  in  size 
(5^x  2^  inches),  it  consists  of  12  -f-  259  pages, 
with  a  list  of  the  author's  works  published  or  pro- 
jected, and  on  the  last  of  the  unpaginated  leaves 
a  Latin  version  of  Psalm  126.  In  the  catalogue  of 
his  works  appended  to  the  Vindicia  Judaorum 
(London,  1656)  Menasseh  includes  "  Piedra 
pretiosa,  of  Nebuchadnezzar's  image,  or  the  fifth 
Monarchy."  This  was  not,  however,  the  real  title. 
The  title  was,  in  truth,  in  Hebrew  Eben  Yekarah, 
and  in  Spanish  Piedra  Gloriosa,  i.  e.,  the  "  Precious 
Stone."  The  date  given  above  for  the  completion 
of  the  book  is  fixed  by  the  dedication,  which  is  ad- 
dressed to  Menasseh's  Christian  friend,  Isaac 
Vossius. 

147 


BY-PATHS  IN  HEBRAIC  BOOKLAND 

On  a  casual  glance  the  book  seems  a  hopeless 
jumble  of  incongruities.  Nebuchadnezzar's  image, 
Jacob's  dream,  the  combat  of  David  and  Goliath, 
the  vision  of  Ezekiel — what  have  these  in  common, 
and  what  has  the  title  to  do  with  them  ?  The  an- 
swer to  these  questions  is  soon  found. 

The  whole  work  is  Messianic,  and  in  his  usual 
symbolic  style,  Menasseh  seizes  on  a  "  Stone  "  as 
the  central  feature  for  his  little  treatise.  There 
was  the  stone,  "  cut  out  without  hands,"  which 
smote  the  image  seen  by  the  king  of  Babylon. 
There  was  the  stone,  gathered  from  the  field  of 
Beth-el,  on  which  Jacob  laid  his  weary  head  to  rest 
when  fleeing  from  his  brother.  There  was  the 
stone,  picked  smooth  from  the  brook,  with  which 
David  slew  the  Philistine.  Perhaps  the  three  were 
one  and  the  same  stone,  Menasseh  seems  to  imply. 
Anyhow,  he  saw  in  all  these  incidents  a  Messianic 
reference.  Nebuchadnezzar's  image,  with  its  feet 
of  clay,  typified  the  Gentiles  that  were  to  rise  and 
fall  before  the  great  day  of  the  Lord.  The  ladder 
of  Jacob,  with  its  ascending  and  descending  angels, 
typified  again  the  rise  and  fall  of  nations.  David's 
victory  over  Goliath  foreshadowed  the  triumph  of 
the  Messiah  over  the  powers  of  earth.  And  the 
whole  is  rounded  off  with  Ezekiel's  vision  of  the 

148 


MENASSEH   BEN  ISRAEL 

(From  an  etching  by  Rembrandt,  in  the  possession  of 
Mr.  Felix  Warburg,  New  York) 


MENASSEH  AND  REMBRANDT 

chariot  with  its  strange  beasts  and  emblems — a 
chariot  which,  in  the  view  accepted  by  Menasseh, 
typified  the  Kingdom  of  the  Messiah. 

Following  the  dedication  to  Vossius  is  an  ex- 
planatory note  to  "  the  Reader."  In  this  note  the 
author  explains  that  to  make  his  meaning  clear  he 
has  added  four  illustrations.  He  does  not  name 
the  artist.  But  we  know  that  he  was  none  other 
than  Menasseh's  neighbor  and  intimate,  Rem- 
brandt. Four  etchings,  signed  by  Rembrandt  and 
dated  1654,  are  possessed  by  more  than  one  library; 
probably  the  fullest  sets  are  to  be  found  in  the 
Fitzwilliam  and  British  Museums.  They  were 
originally  etched  on  one  plate,  which  was  after- 
wards cut  into  four.  When  all  four  etchings 
formed  one  plate,  the  arrangement  was  (as  Mr. 
Middleton  explains  in  his  Descriptive  Catalogue  o»f 
the  Etched  Work  of  Rembrandt,  p.  240)  : 

(I)  Upper  left:  Nebuchadnezzar's  Image.  Clothed  only  about 
the  loins;  there  is  a  band  or  fillet  about  the  head, 
and  a  short  cloak  hangs  behind.  The  stone  which 
breaks  the  legs  of  the  image  (the  feet  are  seen  fall- 
ing to  the  left)  has  been  cast  from  a  roughly  shaped 
rock.  The  stone  is  near  part  of  a  globe;  illustrating 
the  text  "  And  the  stone  that  broke  the  image  became 
a  great  mountain,  and  filled  the  whole  *ar*A"(Daniel 

149 


BY-PATHS  IN  HEBRAIC  BOOKLAND 

2.  35).  The  brow  is  inscribed  "  Babel,"  the  right  and 
left  arras  "  Persae  "  and  "  Medi,"  the  waist  "  Graeci," 
the  legs  "  Romani  "  and  "  Mahometani."  These  names 
only  appear  in  the  fifth  "  state  "  of  the  etching.  There's 
a  proof  of  the  fourth  "state"  in  Paris,  which  beats 
the  names  written  in  Rembrandt's  own  hand. 
(II)  Upper  right:  Piston  of  Ezekiel.  The  lower  part,  in  the 
foreground,  shows  the  four  creatures  of  the  chariot; 
above  is  a  "  glory,"  amid  the  rays  of  which  is  seen 
the  Almighty,  surrounded  by  adoring  angels. 

(III)  Lower    left:   Jacob's   Ladder.     The    patriarch,    bearded, 

lies  half-way  up  the  ladder,  tended  by  an  angel, 
others  are  bending  down  in  gaze,  while  one  figure 
is  seen  mounting  the  rungs  immediately  above. 

(IV)  Lower  right:    Combat  of  David  and  Goliath.     The  most 

spirited  drawing  of  all;  in  a  scene  overhung  by 
rocks  with  warriors  looking  on,  the  giant  grasps  his 
lance  in  his  left  hand  and  with  shield  advanced  on 
his  right  arm  is  charging  David,  who  has  his  sling 
in  action  over  his  right  shoulder. 

The  Museum,  as  already  implied,  possesses  proof 
of  the  etchings  in  various  "  states  " — the  artist 
touched  and  retouched  them,  until  they  assumed  the 
state  reproduced  by  the  present  writer  in  1906,  in 
commemoration  of  the  tercentenary  of  Rem- 
brandt's birth.  The  etchings  are  beautiful  tokens 
of  sympathy  between  the  Rabbi  and  the  painter. 
The  various  "  states  "  show,  as  Mr.  I.  Solomons 

150 


MENASSEH  AND  JREMBRANDT 

has  suggested,  that  Rembrandt  took  unremitting 
pains  to  obtain  Menasseh's  approval  of  his  work. 

Yet  he  failed  to  win  this  approval.  It  is  pretty 
certain  that  the  etchings  were  never  used.  Mr. 
Fairfax  Murray  possessed  the  Piedra  Gloriosa  with 
the  etchings,  and  has  now  presented  the  volume  to 
the  University  Library,  Cambridge;  another  copy 
is  to  be  seen  in  the  Musee  Carnavalet,  Paris,  a  copy 
formerly  owned  by  M.  Dutuit  of  Rouen.  But  Mr. 
Solomons  seems  right  in  asserting  that  "  the  origi- 
nal etchings  in  the  copies  of  Mr.  Murray  and  M. 
Dutuit  were  no  doubt  inserted  after  by  admirers  of 
Rembrandt's  work,  but  certainly  not  with  the 
knowledge  and  sanction  of  Menasseh."  Why  not? 
The  etchings  are  good  work;  they  really  illustrate 
their  subject,  and  must  have  added  to  the  commer- 
cial, as  well  as  to  the  artistic  value  of  Menasseh's 
work. 

The  most  curious  fact  is  that,  though  Rem- 
brandt's etchings  were  never  used,  a  set  of  copper- 
plate engravings,  based,  as  Mr.  Solomons  guesses, 
by  the  Jewish  engraver  Salom  Italia  on  Rem- 
brandt but  not  identical  with  his  work,  is  found  in 
some  copies  of  Menasseh's  book — copies  possessed 
by  Mr.  Solomons,  M.  Didot,  and  the  Levy  Collec- 
tion in  Hamburg.  These  engravings  are  laterally 

151 


BY-PATHS  IN  HEBRAIC  BOOKLAND 

inverted,  the  right  of  Rembrandt's  etchings  be- 
comes the  left  of  Salom  Italia's  engravings.  There 
are  other  differences  in  detail,  all  calculated  to  ren- 
der the  pictures  more  fitted  for  book  illustration, 
but  of  all  the  changes  only  one  is  of  consequence, 
and  it  was  Mr.  Solomons  who  detected  the  real 
significance  of  the  change. 

The  change  referred  to  gives  the  clue  to  the 
whole  mystery.  On  comparing  the  two  versions  of 
the  Vision  of  Ezekiel  a  striking  variation  is  dis- 
cernible. The  figure  of  the  Almighty  has  been 
suppressed!  Here  was  the  fatal  defect  in  Rem- 
brandt's work.  Menasseh  could  not  possibly  use  a 
drawing  in  which  the  Deity  is  represented ;  he  was 
not  the  one  to  repeat  the  inadvertence  of  the  artist 
of  the  Sarajevo  Haggadah.  Possibly  he  only  de- 
tected the  fault  at  the  last  hour.  But  a  fatality 
clung  to  the  second  set  of  illustrations  also.  Sev- 
eral copies  of  the  Pledra  Gloriosa  are  extant  with- 
out any  pictures  at  all. 


152 


LANCELOT  ADDISON  ON  THE  BARBARY 
JEWS 

"  Justice  is  done  to  the  private  virtues  of  the 
Jews  of  Barbary."  So  Mr.  Francis  Espinasse  re- 
marks in  his  biography  of  Lancelot  Addison.  It  is 
an  accurate  comment.  Lancelot,  the  father  of  the 
more  famous  Joseph  Addison — who  himself  wrote 
so  amiably  of  the  Jews  a  generation  later — spent 
several  years  in  Africa  as  English  chaplain.  Born 
in  1632,  he  showed  an  independent  mind  at  Oxford. 
He  roughly  handled  some  of  the  University  Puri- 
tans in  1658,  and  was  promptly  compelled  to  recant 
his  speech  on  his  knees  in  open  Convocation.  Tan- 
gier came  into  the  possession  of  Charles  II  in  1662. 
Lancelot  Addison  had  officiated  in  Dunkirk  for  the 
previous  three  years ;  but  when  that  port  was  given 
up  to  the  French,  Addison  was  transferred  to 
Morocco. 

Here  he  kept  his  eyes  open.  Several  lively  vol- 
umes came  from  him  on  Tangier  life,  on  Moham- 
medanism, on  Moorish  politics.  The  most 
remarkable  of  these  deals  with  the  Jews.  So  popu- 
lar was  this  volume  on  their  "  Present  State  "  that 

153 


BY-PATHS  IN  HEBRAIC  BOOKLAND 

three  editions  were  called  for.  The  first  came  out 
in  1675.  If  one  may  judge  by  the  British  Museum 
copy,  it  lacked  the  awesome  frontispiece  which  may 
be  seen  in  the  edition  of  1676.  Though  super- 
scribed u  The  Present  State  of  the  Jews  in  Bar- 
bary,"  the  almost  naked  figure  is  not  meant  to 
represent  a  child  of  Israel.  The  personage  de- 
picted wears  a  gorgeously  feathered  hat  and  a  short 
waist-covering,  also  of  feathers.  Add  to  this  a  spear 
bigger  than  its  wielder,  and  you  have  his  full  cos- 
tume. It  is  less  Addison's  than  his  illustrator's 
idea  of  a  typical  Moor. 

From  the  very  opening  paragraph  of  the  dedi- 
cation we  see  that  Lancelot  possessed  some  of  his 
son's  gift  of  gentle  humor.  He  had  inscribed  a 
former  book  to  Secretary  Williamson,  and  he  now 
repeats  the  act,  u  it  faring  with  Scriblers,  as  with 
those  Votaries  who  never  forsake  the  Saint  they 
once  finde  propitious."  As  for  his  account  of  the 
Jews,  he  claims  that  his  is  more  "  particular  and 
true  "  than  other  descriptions,  "  this  being,"  he 
says,  "  the  result  of  Conversation  and  not  of  Re- 
port." (u  Conversation,"  of  course,  he  uses  in  the 
old  sense  of  "  direct  intercourse  ").  Some  of  the 
modern  assailants  of  the  Jews  who  appropriate 
aristocratic  names  will  hardly  like  Addison's  justi- 

154 


LANCELOT  ADDISON  ON  THE  BARBARY  JEWS 

fication  of  his  interest.  It  is  because  of  their  clear 
genealogies  and  ancient  lineage  that  he  in  the  first 
instance  admires  the  Jews.  And  if  their  ancestry 
was  noble,  they  were  not  less  happy  in  their  primi- 
tive religion.  "  Now  seeing  that  they  have  been 
the  channel  of  so  many  benefits  to  the  rest  of  man- 
kind, they  ought  to  be  the  matter  of  our  thankful 
Reflection,  and  not  of  our  obloquy  and  reproach." 
With  fine  indignation,  he  goes  on  to  resent  the 
manner  in  which  the  Jews  of  Barbary  were  "  lorded 
over  by  the  imperious  and  haughty  Moor."  The 
Moorish  boys  beat  the  Jewish  children,  and  the 
latter  dare  not  retaliate.  "  The  Moors  permit  not 
the  Jews  the  possession  of  any  war-like  weapons, 
unless  in  point  of  Trade."  Addison  adds  that  this 
gratifies  the  Jews,  who  are,  he  asserts,  as  "  desti- 
tute of  true  courage  as  of  good  nature."  It  is 
important  to  remember  these  severe  remarks  on 
the  Jewish  character,  as  it  shows  that  when  the 
author  praises  he  does  so  not  from  partiality  but 
from  conviction.  Curiously  enough,  he  has  hardly 
done  calling  them  cowards,  when  he  tells  us  that  the 
Christians  and  Moors  use  the  Jews  for  "  sending 
them  upon  hazardous  messages,"  such  as  "  collect- 
ing the  maritime  imposts,"  an  office  which  must 
have  needed  more  than  a  little  hardihood. 

155 


BY-PATHS  IN  HEBRAIC  BOOKLAND 

Our  author  contrasts  the  black  caps  of  the  Jews 
with  the  red  of  the  Moors,  and  has  other  quaint 
details  as  to  costume.  He  then  calls  attention  to 
the  religious  unanimity  of  the  Jews.  '  They  are 
signally  vigilant  to  avoid  divisions,  as  looking  upon 
those  among  Christian  Professors,  to  be  an  argu- 
ment against  the  truth  of  the  things  they  profess." 
This  is  amusing,  coming  from  a  man  who,  through- 
out his  life,  was  a  rather  sturdy  opponent  of  union 
among  the  Christian  bodies.  And  what  would  he 
think  of  the  unity  among  Jews  if  he  could  see  our 
"present  state"?  Addison  then  enters  into  a 
eulogy  of  the  sobriety  and  temperance  of  the  Jews; 
he  terms  their  conduct  "  well  civilised,"  and  de- 
clares that  they  "  cannot  be  charged  with  any  of 
those  Debauches  which  are  grown  unto  reputation 
with  whole  nations  of  Christians."  Then  he  speci- 
fies. "  Adultery,  Drunkenness,  Gluttony,  Pride  of 
Apparel,  etc.,  are  so  far  from  being  in  request  with 
them  that  they  are  scandalised  at  their  frequent 
practice  in  Christians."  Again  and  again  the 
author  laments  that  he  has  to  praise  the  Synagogue 
at  the  expense  of  the  Church.  But  he  takes  it  out 
in  firm  abuse  of  the  rabbinic  theology,  information 
on  which  he  obtained  from  a  local  Rabbi,  "  Aaron 
Ben-Netas  " — a  not  unlearned  man,  he  says,  one 

156 


LANCELOT  ADDISON  ON  THE  BARBARY  JEWS 

who  only  needed  to  be  a  Christian  to  be  thoroughly 
worthy  of  esteem. 

But  we  must  pass  over  Addison's  elaborate 
analysis  of  the  Jewish  creed,  and  of  his  many  curi- 
ous and  mostly  accurate  details  on  rites  and  super- 
stitions. The  notable  thing  is  that  as  soon  as  he 
touches  fundamental  social  questions,  his  eulogy  of 
the  Jews  reappears.  "  Orderly  and  decent  "  are 
the  adjectives  he  uses  of  the  Jewish  marriage  cus- 
toms. I  regret  that  I  am  unable  to  find  space  for 
Addison's  allusion  to  the  fashions  of  dressing  the 
brides  for  the  canopies,  or  rather  "  bowers  and 
arbours,"  which  in  Barbary  replaced  the  canopies 
used  in  other  countries.  Thus  the  custom  in  some 
American  homes  of  performing  Jewish  marriages 
under  a  floral  bower  rather  than  a  canopy  has  its 
analogue  in  the  past.  Very  significant  is  another 
statement  about  marriage.  Theoretically  he  found 
polygamy  defended,  but  monogamy  was  the  rule  of 
life.  "  The  Jews  of  whom  I  now  write,  though 
they  greatly  magnify  and  extol  the  concession  of 
polygamy,  yet  they  are  not  very  fond  of  its  prac- 
tice." He  ascribes  this  abstinence  to  policy  rather 
than  to  religion,  and  there  is  more  truth  in  this 
than  Addison  saw.  For  such  social  institutions  are 
entirely  a  matter  for  the  social  conscience,  and 

157 


BY-PATHS  IN  HEBRAIC  BOOKLAND 

"  policy  "  dictates  them.  So  long  as  social  insti- 
tutions remain  within  the  bounds  of  such  sanctifi- 
cation  as  religion  can  approve,  religion  must  be 
content  to  follow  "  policy."  Monogamy  is  so 
clearly  felt  to  be  the  best  policy  for  mankind,  under 
modern  conditions,  that  religion  in  the  West  main- 
tains it.  "  Religion  "  and  "  policy  "  are  here  at 
one. 

Addison  fairly  gives  his  enthusiasm  the  rein 
when  he  discusses  Jewish  education.  '  The  care 
of  the  Jews  is  very  laudable  in  this  particular,  there 
being  not  many  people  in  the  world  more  watchful 
to  have  their  children  early  tinctured  with  religion 
than  the  present  Hebrews."  Though  they  usually 
speak  "  Moresco,  the  Language  of  their  Nativity, 
and  a  sort  of  Spanish  which  enables  them  for  Traf- 
fick,"  they  learn  Hebrew.  The  children,  he  in- 
forms us,  are  usually  taught  the  Hebrew  for  the 
domestic  utensils  and  "  terms  of  Traffick  Nego- 
tiation." The  method  was  quite  in  accord  with 
modern  ideas  of  teaching  a  language.  "  By  this 
Order  they  furnish  the  Children  with  a  Nomen- 
clature of  Hebrew  Words ;  and  all  this  before  they 
admit  them  to  Syntax  and  Construction."  Addison 
pictures  the  Jewish  Sabbath  with  some  charm;  he 
even  cites  passages  from  Luria,  to  whom  the  home 

158 


LANCELOT  ADDISON  ON  THE  BARBARY  JEWS 

and  synagogue  rites  of  the  day  of  rest  owe  so  much. 
On  no  subject  is  our  author  more  interesting  than 
with  regard  to  the  Jewish  charities.  The  Jews  live 
"  in  a  more  mutual  charity  of  alms  than  either  the 
Moor  or  Christians  " ;  and  Addison  admits,  "  it 
cannot  be  denied  that  the  Jews'  manner  of  reliev- 
ing the  poor,  is  regular  and  commendable."  In  his 
day  it  was,  as  it  is  in  ours,  the  Synagogue's  ideal  to 
relieve  its  own  poor.  There  were  no  beggars  in  the 
Barbary  Jewry.  "  For  though  among  the  Jews  of 
Barbary  there  is  a  great  store  of  needy  persons,  yet 
they  are  supplied  after  a  manner  which  much  con- 
ceals (as  to  men  of  other  religions)  their  poverty." 
Obviously  Addison  would  like  these  people  to  be- 
come Christians.  Why  do  they  refuse?  The 
"  stiffness  of  their  necks,"  on  the  one  hand,  and  the 
"  naughtiness  of  our  lives,"  on  the  other,  cries  the 
author.  The  "  naughtiness  "  will,  let  us  hope,  be 
more  easily  removed  than  the  "  stiffness."  Lance- 
lot Addison,  says  Macaulay,  "  made  some  figure  in 
the  world."  He  deserved  to  do  so.  His  book  on 
the  Jews  was  a  credit  to  his  power  of  observation 
and  his  goodness  of  heart. 


159 


THE  BODENSCHATZ  PICTURES 

Johann  Christoph  Georg  Bodenschatz,  a  priest 
of  Uttenreuth,  underwent  a  triple  training  for  his 
great  work  on  Jewish  Ceremonial.  He  studied 
literature,  observed  facts,  and  used  his  hands.  The 
Jewish  Encyclopedia  remarks  that  he  "  is  said  to 
have  made  elaborate  models  of  the  Ark  of  Noah 
and  of  the  Tabernacle  in  the  Wilderness."  There 
is  no  reason  for  the  qualifying  words  "  is  said." 
In  a  dedicatory  epistle  to  the  Margrave  Friederich 
of  Brandenburg,  Bodenschatz  distinctly  informs  us 
that  in  1739  he  constructed  these  models,  "  after 
the  records  of  Scripture  and  of  Jewish  Antiquities." 
He  adds  that  the  models  were  preserved  in  the 
royal  Kunst  und  Naturaliencabinet.  I  cannot  say 
whether  they  still  exist;  but  at  the  beginning  of  last 
century,  the  Tabernacle  was  at  Bayreuth  and  the 
Ark  at  Nuremberg. 

In  1748  Bodenschatz  began  to  issue  his  work  on 
the  Jews;  he  completed  the  publication  in  the  next 
year.  In  it  he  dealt  with  the  Jewish  religion 
(Kirchliche  V  erf  as  sung  der  heutigen  Juden,  somder- 
lich  derer  in  Deutschland) .  He  had  planned  a  con- 

160 


THE  BODENSCHATZ  PICTURES 

tinuation  on  the  Civil  Laws  of  the  Synagogue.  But 
he  left  it  unfinished,  though  he  lived  another  half- 
century.  Perhaps  he  had  exhausted  all  his  means, 
for  the  thirty  copper-plates  must  have  been  expen- 
sive. The  very  title-page  states  he  paid  for  them 
out  of  his  own  pocket.  These  illustrations  he  in- 
troduced with  a  double  object:  they  were,  in  part, 
to  serve  as  an  ornament,  but  chiefly  as  an  elucida- 
tion of  the  text.  Both  his  book  and  his  pictures  be- 
came very  popular,  and  did  much  to  secure  for 
Judaism  a  favorable  consideration  in  Germany. 

As  we  know  that  Bodenschatz  possessed  some 
artistic  skill,  we  may  safely  assume  that  he  inspired 
and  assisted  the  artists  whom  he  employed.  He 
docs  not  appear,  however,  to  have  done  any  of  the 
drawings  with  his  own  hand.  Nearly  all  the  pic- 
tures are  signed.  Most  of  them  were  designed  by 
Eichler  in  Erlangen,  and  engraved  by  G.  Nusbiegel 
in  Nuremberg.  Both  of  these  belonged  to  artistic 
families;  there  were  three  generations  of  Eichlers, 
and  a  Nusbiegel  engraved  illustrations  for  Lava- 
ter's  works.  One  of  the  Bodenschatz  pictures  was 
engraved  by  C.  M.  Roth;  another,  among  the  best 
of  the  whole  series — the  illustration  of  Shehitah — 
was  drawn  by  Johann  Conrad  Miiller.  It  would  be 
interesting  to  collect  the  names  of  those  Christian 
ii  161 


BY-PATHS  IN  HEBRAIC  BOOKLAND 

artists  and  mechanics  who,  in  the  seventeenth  and 
eighteenth  centuries,  were  engaged  in  illustrating 
books  on  Judaism.  There  was,  for  instance,  the 
Englishman  R.  Vaughan  who  worked  at  Josephus 
(Josippon)  ;  there  was  the  Frenchman  Bernard 
Picart ;  and  there  were  very  many  others,  though  the 
exquisite  medallions,  which  adorn  the  title-pages  of 
all  six  volumes  of  Surrenhusius'  Latin  Mishnah, 
were  from  a  Jewish  hand. 

Bodenschatz  made  use  of  his  predecessor  Picart, 
whose  twenty  plates  illustrative  of  the  "  Ceremonies 
des  Juifs  "  appeared  in  Amsterdam  in  1723.  But 
what  he  chiefly  owed  to  Picart  was  the  composition 
of  the  groups;  the  details  are  mostly  original. 
Similarly  he  derived  his  idea  for  the  processions  of 
the  bride  and  the  bridegroom,  with  their  musical 
performers,  from  Kirchner,  but  here,  again,  the 
details  are  his  own,  and  the  total  effect  is  full  of 
charm.  I  do  not  wish,  by  any  means,  to  depre- 
ciate Kirchner,  who  in  his  Jiidisches  Ceremoniel 
(1726)  has  some  fine  engravings.  One  of  them, 
depicting  the  preparation  of  the  Passover  bread,  is 
as  vigorous  as  anything  in  Bodenschatz,  though  I 
think  that  the  latter  is,  on  the  average,  superior  to 
Kirchner.  Readers  can  easily  judge  the  character 
both  of  the  Bodenschatz  and  the  Kirchner  pictures 

162 


THE  BODENSCHATZ  PICTURES 

from  the  specimens  so  wisely  reproduced  in  the 
volumes  of  the  Jewish  Encyclopedia.  No  one  need 
complain  that  the  Encyclopedia  prints  these  illus- 
trations too  profusely.  For — to  limit  my  remarks 
to  Bodenschatz — though  copies  of  that  worthy's 
book  are  common  enough,  many  of  them  are  in- 
complete. From  the  British  Museum  example,  six 
of  the  thirty  plates  are  missing;  the  Cambridge 
copy  also  lacks  some  of  the  plates,  in  particular  the 
marriage  ceremony  under  the  canopy,  which,  how- 
ever, may  be  seen  in  the  Jewish  Encyclopedia, 
vol.  vi,  p.  504.  On  the  other  hand,  the  Encyclo- 
pedia (vol.  iii,  p.  432)  somewhat  exaggerates  the 
glare  of  the  eyes  in  the  grim  realism  of  Boden- 
schatz's  picture  of  an  interment. 

What  is  assuredly  one  of  the  most  interesting  of 
Bodenschatz's  plates  does  not,  so  far  as  I  have 
noticed,  appear  in  the  Encyclopedia.  I  refer  to  the 
Pentecost  celebrations,  where  Bodenschatz  shows 
us  both  the  cut  flowers  and  the  growing  plants  in 
the  synagogue  decorations  of  the  day.  The  floral 
border  of  this  plate  is  particularly  well  conceived. 
Very  attractive,  too,  is  the  picture  of  Blessing  the 
New  Moon:  the  outlines  of  the  houses  stand  out 
in  bold  relief.  Bodenschatz  is  careful  to  inform 
us  that  the  favorite  time  for  the  ceremony  is  a 

163 


BY-PATHS  IN  HEBRAIC  BOOKLAND 

Saturday  night,  when  the  men  are  still  dressed  in 
their  Sabbath  clothes,  and  thus  make  a  good  show. 
The  Priestly  Benediction  is  also  a  notable  success; 
the  Cohen  with  his  hands  to  his  eyes  impresses. 
More  than  once  Bodenschatz  depicts  a  curious 
scene,  once  common  now  almost  unknown.  On  the 
front  of  the  synagogue  is  a  star,  cut  in  stone,  and 
after  the  marriage  the  husband  shatters  a  vessel  by 
casting  it  at  the  star.  The  glass,  where  the  custom 
is  retained,  is  now  broken  under  the  canopy. 
By  the  way,  the  author  also  introduces  us  to  the 
more  familiar  ceremony  of  the  same  nature  at  the 
actual  wedding  or  betrothal.  Altogether  ingenious 
is  the  plate  on  which  are  diagrammatically  repre- 
sented the  various  forms  of  boundaries  connected 
with  the  Sabbath  law. 

Naturally  a  goodly  number  of  the  pictures  deal 
with  curiosities.  The  quainter  side  of  Jewish  cere- 
monial obviously  appeals  to  an  artist.  Thus  the 
waving  of  the  cock  before  the  Day  of  Atonement, 
the  Lilit  inscriptions  over  the  bed  of  the  new-born 
infant,  the  Mikweh,  the  Halizah  shoe,  make  their 
due  appearance.  But  Bodenschatz  does  not  show 
these  things  to  ridicule  them.  He  is  among  the 
most  objective  of  those  who,  before  our  own  days, 
sought  to  reproduce  synagogue  scenes.  He  must 

164 


THE  BODENSCHATZ  PICTURES 

have  had  a  very  full  experience  of  these  scenes;  he 
must  have  been  an  eye-witness.  It  would  seem  as 
though  he  meant  us  to  gather  this  from  one  of  his 
Sabbath  pictures,  of  which  he  has  several.  I  do  not 
refer  to  the  vividness  of  the  touches  in  his  represen- 
tation of  the  Friday  night  at  home — though  this 
illustration  presupposes  personal  knowledge.  Nor 
do  I  refer  to  his  pictures  of  Sabbath  ovens,  for  these 
could  have  been  examined  in  shops.  But  what  I 
allude  to  is  this.  In  his  picture  of  the  interior  of 
the  synagogue,  we  see  the  Sabbath  service  in 
progress.  Standing  on  the  right,  looking  on,  is  a 
hatless  observer.  Does  Bodenschatz  mean  this  for 
himself,  thus  suggesting  that  he  had  often  been  a 
spectator  where  the  rest  were  participators?  It 
may  be  so.  Anyhow,  most  of  those  who  have  had 
to  steep  themselves  in  literature  of  this  kind  have 
a  warm  feeling  of  regard  for  Bodenschatz.  He 
was  not  invariably  just,  but  he  was  never  unkind ; 
no  mistakes  that  he  made  (and  he  is  on  the  whole 
conspicuously  accurate)  were  due  to  prejudice. 
Any  scholar,  any  artist,  would  be  proud  to  deserve 
such  a  verdict. 


165 


LESSING'S  FIRST  JEWISH  PLAY 

There  are  bigger  virtues  than  consistency,  and  I 
have  spared  a  good  word  for  that  human  chame- 
leon Leon  Modena.  But,  undeniably,  a  great 
career  is  all  the  nobler  when  through  it  there  runs 
a  consistent  purpose.  Wordsworth,  in  a  famous 
poem,  asked: 

Who  is  the  happy  warrior  ?    Who  is  he 

That  every  man  in  arms  should  wish  to  be? 

And  the  first  sentence  of  his  answer  runs : 

It  is  the  generous  spirit,  who,  when  brought 
Among  the  tasks  of  real  life,  hath  wrought 
Upon  the  plan  that  pleased  his  childish  thought. 

If  this  be  so,  then  Lessing  was  a  happy  warrior 
indeed.  For  religious  tolerance  is  interwoven  with 
his  combative  life.  It  was  the  ideal  of  his  boyhood 
and  of  his  age.  It  is  to  be  seen  in  his  "  Nathan," 
the  masterpiece  of  his  mature  genius,  and  it  equally 
underlay  his  youthful  drama  The  Jews.  Nathan 
the  Wise  is  Mendelssohn,  and  was  drawn  on  the 
basis  of  experience ;  but  the  "  Traveller,"  who  is  the 
hero  of  Die  Juden  is  no  individual,  having  been 
drawn  by  Lessing  out  of  his  own  good  heart. 
Thirty  years  separate  the  two  plays  (written,  re- 

166 


LESSING'S  FIRST  JEWISH  PLAY 

spectively,  in  1749  and  1779) .    But  they  are  united 
in  spirit. 

Die  Juden  is  a  short  composition,  even  though  it 
includes  twenty-three  scenes.  Some  of  these  scenes 
are  very  brief.  The  plot  is  quite  simple.  A  baron 
and  his  daughter  are  saved  by  a  traveller  from 
robbers;  the  impression  made  by  the  rescuer  is  so 
great,  that  the  baron  is  inclined  to  find  in  him  a 
son-in-law.  Then  the  traveller  reveals  the  fact 
that  he  is  a  Jew.  Baron  and  Jew  part  with  mutual 
esteem.  Dramatically,  the  play  is  not  of  much 
merit.  The  "  Traveller  "  is  not  so  much  a  person 
as  a  personification.  He  is  the  type  of  virtue, 
honor,  magnanimity.  He  leaves  one  cold,  not  be- 
cause, as  Michaelis  objected  in  1754,  he  is  impossi- 
bly, or  at  least  improbably,  perfect,  but  because  he 
is  crudely  and  mechanically  drawn.  Mendelssohn 
completely  rebutted  the  criticism  of  Michaelis;  but, 
none  the  less,  the  "  Traveller "  possesses  little 
of  that  human,  personal  quality  which  makes 
"  Nathan  "  so  convincing  and  interesting.  On  the 
other  hand,  the  baron  is  admirably  painted.  He  is 
not  a  bigoted  Jew-hater;  he  is  simply  animated  by 
a  conventional  dislike  of  Jews.  Lessing,  even  in 
his  student  years,  was  too  good  an  artist  to  daub 
on  his  colors  too  glaringly. 

167 


BY-PATHS  IN  HEBRAIC  BOOKLAND 

The  importance  of  Die  Juden  is  to  be  found,  as 
we  have  seen,  in  its  anticipation  of  Nathan  der 
Weise.  Sometimes  the  identity  of  thought  is  strik- 
ingly close.  In  the  fourth  act  of  Nathan  occurs 
this  dialogue: 

Friar:  Nathan!  Nathan!  You  are  a  Christian!  By  God,  you 
are  a  Christian !  There  never  was  a  better  Christian ! 

Nathan:  We  are  of  one  mind!  For  that  which  makes  me,  in 
your  eyes,  a  Christian,  makes  you,  in  my  eyes,  a  Jew ! 

Compare  (as  Niemeyer  has  done)  the  exchanges 
in  Die  Juden: 

Baron:  How  estimable  would  the  Jews  be  if  they  were  all 
like  you ! 

Traveller:  And  how  admirable  the  Christians,  if  they  all  pos- 
sessed your  qualities! 

A  Tsar  is  said  to  have  repeated  pretty  much  the 
baron's  speech  to  Sir  Moses  Montefiore.  It  is  not 
recorded  that  the  latter  made  the  traveller's  reply. 

Edmund  Burke,  in  one  of  his  speeches  on 
America,  protested  that  it  was  impossible  to  draw 
up  "  an  indictment  against  a  whole  people.''  He 
forgot  the  frequency  with  which  such  indictments 
are  drawn  up  against  the  Jews.  Now  if  there  was 
one  thing  that  more  than  the  rest  roused  Lessing's 
anger,  it  was  just  this  tarring  of  all  Jews  with  one 
brush.  One  can  conceive  the  glee  with  which  Les- 
sing  wrote  the  passage  in  which  the  baron  commits 

168 


LESSING'S  FIRST  JEWISH  PLAY 

this  very  offence,  unconscious  of  his  peculiarly  un- 
fortunate faux  pas,  for  he  has  no  notion  yet  that 
the  traveller  is  a  Jew : 

Baron:  It  seems  to  me  that  the  very  faces  of  the  Jews  prejudice 
one  against  them.  You  can  read  in  their  eyes  their  mali- 
ciousness, deceit,  perjury.  Why  do  you  turn  away  from  me? 

Traveller:  I  see  you  are  very  learned  in  physiognomies — I  am 
afraid,  sir,  that  mine  .... 

Baron:  O,  you  wrong  me!  How  could  you  entertain  such  a 
suspicion?  Without  being  learned  in  physiognomies,  I  must 
tell  you  I  have  never  met  with  a  more  frank,  generous, 
and  pleasing  countenance  than  yours. 

Traveller:  To  tell  you  the  truth,  I  do  not  approve  of  generali- 
zations concerning  a  whole  people  ....  I  should  think  that 
among  all  nations  good  and  wicked  are  to  be  found. 

These  quotations  will  suffice  to  convey  an  idea 
of  the  aim  of  the  dramatist  and  of  the  manner  in 
which  it  is  carried  out.  There  is  a  certain  amount 
of  comic  relief  to  the  gravity  of  the  main  plot.  The 
foot-pad  and  garroter,  Martin  Krumm,  cuts  an 
amusing  figure  as  an  assailant  of  the  honesty  of 
the  Jews.  "  A  Christian  would  have  given  me  a 
kick  in  the  ribs  and  not  a  snuff-box,"  says  Christo- 
pher, the  traveller's  servant.  Christopher  is  a 
funny  rogue.  When  his  master  cannot  find  him, 
and  naturally  complains,  the  servant  replies:  "  I 
can  only  be  in  one  place  at  one  time.  Is  it  my  fault 
that  you  did  not  go  to  that  place?  You  say  you 

169 


BY-PATHS  IN  HEBRAIC  BOOKLAND 

have  to  search  for  me?  Surely  you'll  always  find 
me  where  I  am." 

There  were  a  few  attempts  prior  to  Lessing  to 
present  the  Jew  in  a  favorable  light  on  the  stage, 
as  Sir  Sidney  Lee  has  shown.  But  between  Shylock 
and  Nathan  there  stretches  a  lurid  desert,  broken 
only  by  the  oasis  of  Die  Juden.  To  some  it  may 
occur  that  the  battle  of  tolerance  fought  by  Lessing 
did  not  end  in  a  permanent  victory.  Lessing  him- 
self would  not  have  been  disquieted  at  that  result. 
As  he  expressed  it,  the  search  for  truth  rather  than 
the  possession  of  truth  is  the  highest  human  good. 
A  leading  Viennese  paper  said  some  few  years  ago 
that  if  Nathan  the  Wise  had  been  written  now,  it 
would  have  been  hissed  off  the  German  stage.  It  is 
not  unlikely.  Fortunately,  Lessing  wrote  before 
1880!  Nathan  does  not  remain  unacted.  I  saw 
Possart  play  the  title-role  in  Munich  in  the  nine- 
ties. His  splendid  elocution  carried  off  Nathan's 
long  speeches  with  wonderful  absence  of  monotony. 

A  thing  of  truth  is  a  boon  forever,  because  it 
makes  further  progress  in  truth-seeking  certain. 
Because  there  has  been  one  Lessing,  there  must  be 
others.  And  if  Nathan  the  Wise  be  thus  a  last- 
ing inspiration,  let  us  not  forget  that  the  poet  was 
trying  his  hand,  and  maturing  his  powers,  by  writ- 
ing the  play  which  has  served  as  the  subject  of  this 
sketch.  170 


ISAAC  PINTO'S  PRAYER-BOOK 

It  was  in  America  that  the  first  English  transla- 
tion of  the  Synagogue  Prayer-Book  appeared 
(1761  and  1766).  Often  has  attention  been  drawn 
to  the  curiosity  that  this  latter  volume  was  pub- 
lished not  in  London  but  in  New  York.  The  1761 
edition  has  only  recently  been  discovered  by 
Dr.  Pool;  with  the  1766  work  we  have  long  been 
familiar.  According  to  the  Bibliotheca  Anglo- 
Judaica  (p.  174) ,  "  the  Mahamad  would  not  allow 
a  translation  to  be  printed  in  England."  If  such 
a  refusal  was  made,  we  must  at  least  amend  the 
last  words,  and  read  in  English  for  in  England. 
For  it  was  in  London,  in  1740,  that  Isaac  Nieto's 
Spanish  rendering  of  the  prayers  for  New  Year 
and  Day  of  Atonement  saw  the  light  of  publication. 

Indeed,  in  Isaac  Pinto's  preface  the  point  is  made 
quite  clear.  "  In  Europe,"  he  says,  "  the  Spanish 
and  Portuguese  Jews  have  a  translation  in  Spanish, 
which,  as  they  generally  understand,  may  be  suffi- 
cient; but  that  not  being  the  case  in  the  British 
Dominions  in  America,  has  induced  me  to  attempt 
a  translation,  not  without  hope  that  it  may  tend  to 

171 


BY-PATHS  IN  HEBRAIC  BOOKLAND 

the  improvement  of  many  of  my  brethren  in  their 
devotion."  Admittedly,  then,  Pinto  designed  his 
work  for  American  use ;  at  all  events,  the  objection 
of  the  Mahamad  must  have  been  to  the  language 
used  by  Pinto.  We  know  how  resolutely  Bevis 
Marks  clung  to  Spanish,  and  how  reluctantly  it 
abandoned  some  of  the  quaint  uses  made  of  it  in 
announcements  and  otherwise. 

"  Some  crudities  there  are  in  this  translation,  but 
few  mistakes,  and  the  style  has  a  genuine  devo- 
tional ring,"  says  Mr.  Singer.  Pinto  could  not 
easily  go  wrong,  seeing  that  he  made  use  of  Haham 
Nieto's  "  elegant  Spanish  translation."  Dr.  Gaster 
remarks  that  Pinto's  rendering  "  rests  entirely," 
as  the  author  declares,  on  Nieto's.  Pinto's  exact 
words  are:  "  In  justice  to  the  Learned  and  Rever- 
end H.  H.  R.  Ishac  Nieto,  I  must  acknowledge 
the  very  great  advantage  I  derived  "  from  Nieto's 
work.  Mr.  G.  A.  Kohut  shares  Mr.  Singer's  high 
opinion  of  Pinto's  style.  "  The  translation,"  he 
asserts,  "  seems  to  be  totally  free  from  foreign  ex- 
pressions, and  is  characterized  throughout  by  a 
dignity  and  simplicity  of  diction  which  is  on  the 
whole  admirable."  With  this  favorable  judgment 
all  readers  of  Pinto  will  unhesitatingly  concur.  A 
remarkable  feature  which  Pinto  shares  with  Nieto 

172 


ISAAC  PINTO'S  PRAYER-BOOK 

is  this :  the  translation  appears  without  the  Hebrew 
text.  Commenting  on  the  absence  of  Hebrew, 
Mr.  Singer  observes:  "This  fact  would  seem  to 
show  that  there  must  have  been  an  appreciable 
number  of  persons,  who,  for  purposes  of  private 
worship  at  least,  and  perhaps  also  while  in  attend- 
ance at  synagogue,  depended  upon  English  alone  in 
their  devotions."  On  the  other  hand,  it  is  possible 
that,  as  Hebrew  printing  must  have  been  costly  in 
London  and  New  York  in  the  eighteenth  century, 
the  absence  of  the  Hebrew  may  be  merely  due  to 
the  desire  to  avoid  expenses.  The  translations  may 
have  been  meant  for  use  with  copies  of  the  Hebrew 
text  printed  in  Amsterdam  and  elsewhere  on  the 
continent  of  Europe. 

Pinto's  book  was  small  quarto  in  shape;  it  con- 
tained 191  pages.  There  are  some  peculiarities  on 
the  title-page,  of  which  a  facsimile  may  be  seen  in 
the  Jewish  Encyclopedia,  vol.  x,  page  55  :  "  Pray- 
ers for  Shabbath,  Rosh-Hashanah,  and  Kippur,  or 
the  Sabbath,  the  Beginning  of  the  Year,  and  the 
Day  of  Atonements;  with  the  Amidzh  and  Musaph 
of  the  Mofldim,  or  solemn  seasons.  According  to 
the  Order  of  the  Spanish  and  Portuguese  Jews. 
Translated  by  Isaac  Pinto.  And  for  him  printed 
by  John  Holt,  in  New  York,  A.  M.  5526  " 

173 


BY-PATHS  IN  HEBRAIC  BOOKLAND 

(=  1766).  It  will  be  noted  that  Pinto  indicates 
the  ayin  by  the  use  of  italics  in  the  words  ^midah 
and  Motfdim.  Also,  though  he  employs  the  ordi- 
nary Sephardic  term  for  the  Day  of  Atonement 
(Kippur  without  the  prefix  of  Yom),  he  does  not 
translate  the  singular,  but  the  plural,  for  he  renders 
it  the  "  Day  of  Atonements,"  which  is  not  exactly  a 
blunder  (though  the  Hebrew  Kippurim  is,  of 
course,  really  an  abstract  plural  with  a  singular 
sense). 

But  who  was  Isaac  Pinto?  It  is  not  at  all  clear. 
Same  have  hastily  spoken  of  him  as  though  he 
were  identical  with  Joseph  Jesurun  Pinto,  who  was 
sent  out  by  the  London  Sephardim  to  New  York  in 
1758.  The  home  authorities,  at  the  request  of  the 
New  York  Congregation  Shearith  Israel,  elected  a 
Hazan,  but  the  chosen  candidate,  "  having  since 
declined  going  for  reasons  unknown  to  us,"  writes 
the  London  Mahamad,  through  its  treasurer, 
H.  Men.  da  Costa,  "  we  this  day  (June  7,  1758) 
proceeded  to  a  second  election,  and  our  chois  fell 
on  Mr.  Joseph  Jesurun  Pinto,  who  was  examined 
by  our  direction  and  found  very  well  versed  in  the 
reading  of  the  Pentateuch  and  in  the  functions  of  a 
Hazan."  This  Hazan  could  do  moj*e:  he  was 
able,  as  Mr.  Kohut  shows,  to  write  Hebrew,  for  in 

174 


ISAAC  PINTO'S  PRAYER-BOOK 

October,  1760,  he  composed  a  prayer  for  recita- 
tion on  the  "  General  Thanksgiving  for  the  Reduc- 
ing of  Canada  to  His  Majesty's  Dominions."  The 
prayer  was  written  in  Hebrew,  but  printed  in  Eng- 
lish, being  translated  by  a  "  Friend  of  Truth."  A 
note  at  the  end  of  the  booklet  runs  thus:  "  N.  B. 
The  foregoing  prayer  may  be  seen  in  Hebrew,  at 
the  Composer's  Lodgings."  Mr.  Kohut  adds: 
"  Apparently  original  Hebrew  scholarship  was  a 
curiosity  in  New  York  City  in  1760." 

A  year  before,  Joseph  Jesurun  Pinto  instituted 
the  keeping  of  records  as  to  those  "  entitled  to 
Ashcaboth  "  (memorial  prayers),  and  drew  up  a 
still  used  table  of  the  times  for  beginning  the  Sab- 
bath for  the  meridian  of  New  York;  he  must  have 
been  a  man  of  various  gifts  and  activities. 

What  relation  Isaac  Pinto  was  to  the  Hazan  we 
have  no  means  of  telling.  Joseph's  father  was 
named  Isaac,  but  this  can  scarcely  have  been  our 
translator.  An  Isaac  Pinto  died  in  1791,  aged 
seventy;  he  may  be  (as  Mr.  Kohut  suggests)  the 
translator  in  question;  in  1766  he  would  have  been 
in  his  forty-fifth  year.  Steinschneider  thought  that 
he  was  identical  with  the  author  of  a  work  against 
Voltaire  (Amsterdam,  1762)  and  other  treatises. 
"  But,"  as  Mr.  Kohut  argues,  "  this  versatile 

175 


BY-PATHS  IN  HEBRAIC  BOOKLAND 

author  lived  at  Bordeaux,  while  our  translator  was 
in  all  probability  a  resident  of  New  York."  Mr. 
L.  Hiihner  accepts  this  identification,  and  adds  the 
possibility  that  this  same  Isaac  Pinto  was  settled 
in  Connecticut  as  early  as  1748.  More  certain  is 
it  that  Isaac  Pinto  is  the  same  who  appears  in  the 
earliest  minute-book  of  the  New  York  Congrega- 
tion Shearith  Israel  as  a  contributing  member  and 
seat-holder  (1740,  1747,  and  1750). 

Isaac  Pinto  was  certainly  living  in  New  York 
in  1773.  Ezra  Stiles  was  president  of  Yale  from 
1778  till  1795,  and  in  his  diary  he  makes  many 
references  to  Jews,  as  is  well  known  from  the  pub- 
lications of  the  American  Jewish  Historical  Society. 
Under  date  June  14,  1773,  Stiles  has  this  entry: 
"  In  the  forenoon  I  went  to  visit  the  Rabbi 
(Carigal) — discoursed  on  Ventriloquism  and  the 
Witch  of  Endor  and  the  Reality  of  bringing  up 
Samuel.  He  had  not  heard  of  Ventriloquism  be- 
fore and  still  doubted  it.  He  showed  me  a  Hebrew 
letter  from  Isaac  Pinto  to  a  Jew  in  New  York,  in 
which  Mr.  Pinto,  who  is  now  reading  Aben  Ezra, 
desires  R.  Carigal's  thoughts  upon  some  Arabic  in 
Aben  Ezra."  Prof.  Jastrow,  from  whose  essay  I 
cite  the  last  sentence,  adds :  "  As  late  as  April 

J4»   I79°»  Stiles  refers  to  a  letter  received  from 

176 


ISAAC  PINTO'S  PRAYER-BOOK 

Pinto,  whom  he  speaks  of  as  '  a  learned  Jew  in 
New  York,'  regarding  a  puzzling  Hebrew  inscrip- 
tion found  by  Stiles  in  Kent  in  the  fall  of  1789. 
Unfortunately  there  is  no  other  reference  to  this 
supposed  Hebrew  inscription,  on  which  Pinto  was 
unable  to  throw  any  light."  Stiles  does  not  seem 
to  have  provided  sufficient  data.  We  would  fain 
know  more  of  this  Isaac  Pinto.  But  the  glimpses 
we  get  of  him  are  enough  to  satisfy  us  that  he  was 
a  man  of  uncommon  personality. 


177 


MENDELSSOHN'S  "  JERUSALEM  " 

Of  a  hundred  who  discuss  Moses  Mendelssohn's 
conception  of  Judaism,  perhaps  barely  five  have 
read  Jerusalem,  the  book  in  which  that  conception 
is  most  lucidly  expressed.  It  is  a  common  fate  with 
certain  literary  masterpieces  that  they  are  read  in 
their  own  day  and  talked  about  by  posterity.  The 
fame  of  Mendelssohn,  moreover,  underwent  some- 
thing like  an  eclipse  during  the  last  generation.  To 
paraphrase  what  Antony  said  of  Caesar,  but  yester- 
day his  word  might  have  stood  against  the  world ; 
now,  none  so  poor  as  to  do  him  reverence. 

The  depreciation  of  Mendelssohn  was  due  to  two 
opposite  reasons.  For  some  time,  though  most 
Jews  were  unconscious  of  it,  it  was  becoming  obvi- 
ous that  there  were  two,  and  only  two,  thorough- 
going solutions  of  the  Jewish  problem  for  the 
modern  age.  The  one  may  be  termed  religious 
liberalism,  the  other  territorial  nationalism.  Now, 
Mendelssohn's  views  are  in  accord  with  neither  of 
these  tendencies.  He  was  so  far  from  being  a  terri- 
torialist — and  I  use  that  term  in  the  widest  sense — 
that  he  has  been  acclaimed  and  denounced  as  the 
father  of  assimilation.  He  was  so  remote  from 
liberalism,  that  he  has  been  acclaimed  and  de- 

178 


MENDELSSOHN'S  "  JERUSALEM  " 

nounced  as  the  founder  of  neo-orthodoxy.  His 
theory  of  life  was  that  the  emancipated  Jew  could 
and  must  go  on  obeying  under  the  new  environ- 
ment the  whole  of  the  olden  Jewish  law.  This 
is  not  possible !  cry  both  the  liberal  and  the 
nationalist.  Hence  the  liberal  asserts  one-half,  the 
nationalist  the  other  half  of  the  Mendelssohnian 
theory.  The  liberal  would  modify  the  law,  the 
nationalist  would  change  the  environment.  In 
other  words,  instead  of  holding  Mendelssohn  in 
low  esteem,  both  sides  ought  to  recognize  that  they 
each  derive  half  their  inspiration  from  him. 

And  it  is  fortunate  that  Jews  are,  at  this  junc- 
ture, coming  to  appreciate  Mendelssohn  all  over 
again.  Our  German  brethren  have  just  initiated 
a  capital  series  of  little  books  which  cost  less  than 
a  shilling  each.  The  first  of  these  "  Monuments 
of  the  Jewish  Spirit  "  contains  the  Jerusalem,  and 
much  else  of  Mendelssohn's  work.  Here  one  reads 
again  the  words  first  penned  by  the  Berlin  Socrates 
in  1783:  Judaism  knows  nothing  of  a  revealed 
religion,  Israel  possessed  a  divine  legislation. 
"  Thought  is  free,"  we  can  hear  Mendelssohn 
thundering — if  so  harsh  a  verb  can  be  applied  to 
so  gentle  a  spirit — "  let  no  Government  interfere 
with  men's  mode  of  conceiving  God  and  truth." 

179 


BY-PATHS  IN  HEBRAIC  BOOKLAND 

State  and  religion  are  separated  as  wide  as  the 
poles.  Israel  has  its  own  code,  which  in  no  way 
conflicts  with  the  State;  still  less  does  Israel  seek 
to  impose  that  code  on  the  State.  Mendelssohn 
did  not  believe  that  all  men  were  destined  to  attain 
to  truth  by  the  road  of  Judaism.  "  Judaism  boasts 
of  no  exclusive  revelation  of  immutable  truths  in- 
dispensable to  salvation."  Hence,  too,  "  Judaism 
has  no  articles  of  faith."  It  follows  that  not  un- 
belief was  punished  under  the  Jewish  regime,  but 
contumacious  disobedience.  The  Jew  was  never 
commanded:  believe  this,  disbelieve  that;  but  do 
this,  and  leave  that  undone.  Judaism  is  the  Jew's 
way  of  attaining  goodness,  other  people  can  attain 
it  in  other  ways.  Not  consonance  but  manifold- 
ness  is  the  design  and  end  of  Providence.  "  Religi- 
ous union  is  not  toleration,  it  is  diametrically 
opposed  to  it."  Toleration  consists  rather  in  this: 
"  Reward  and  punish  no  doctrine;  hold  out  no 
allurement  or  bribe  for  the  adoption  of  theological 
opinions."  How  far  in  advance  of  his  age  Men- 
delssohn was!  It  took  a  full  century  after  his 
Jerusalem  for  England  to  abolish  theological  tests 
at  the  universities,  tests  which  indeed  did  "  reward 
and  punish "  doctrines.  Mendelssohn  goes  on : 

"  Let  everyone  who  does  not  disturb  public  happi- 

180 


MENDELSSOHN'S  "  JERUSALEM  " 

ness,  who  is  obedient  to  the  civil  government,  who 
acts  righteously  towards  his  fellow-man,  be  allowed 
to  speak  as  he  thinks,  to  pray  to  God  after  his  own 
fashion,  or  after  the  fashion  of  his  fathers,  and  to 
seek  eternal  salvation  where  he  thinks  he  may  find 
it."  No  one,  unless  it  be  that  earlier  Jewish  phil- 
osopher Spinoza,  had  ever  put  the  case  for  tolera- 
tion so  cogently.  Whether  Mendelssohn's  own 
principles  are  consistent  with  his  further  conclusion 
that  once  a  Jew  always  a  Jew,  will  ever  be  doubted. 
The  Talmud  (Sanhedrin  44a)  had  said:  An 
Israelite,  though  he  sin,  remains  an  Israelite.  Men- 
delssohn rather  said:  An  Israelite  has  no  right  to 
sin.  True,  the  world  need  not  accept  Judaism,  but 
the  Jew  may  never  reject  it.  "  I  do  not  see,"  cries 
Mendelssohn,  "  how  those  who  were  born  in  the 
house  of  Jacob  can,  in  any  conscientious  manner, 
disencumber  themselves  of  the  law.  We  are  al- 
lowed to  think  about  the  law,  to  inquire  into  its 
spirit  ....  but  all  our  fine  reasoning  cannot  ex- 
onerate us  from  the  strict  obedience  we  owe  to  it." 
I  am  not  now  criticising  Mendelssohn.  I  am  trying 
to  expound  him.  To  live  under  the  law  of  the  State 
and  at  the  same  time  to  remain  loyal  to  the  law  of 
Judaism  is  hard.  But  Mendelssohn  went  on: 
Bear  both  burdens.  That  assuredly  is  a  counsel 

181 


BY-PATHS  IN  HEBRAIC  BOOKLAND 

which  should  be  inscribed  in  golden  letters  over  the 
portal  of  Judaism  now,  even  though  we  may  inter- 
pret the' burdens  differently  in  our  different  circum- 
stances. 

Mendelssohn's  masterpiece  includes  much  else. 
But  what  precedes  ought  to  be  enough  to  whet 
readers'  appetites  for  the  whole  meal.  On  an  occa- 
sion when  I  had  a  long  talk  with  William  James, 
I  spoke  to  him  of  Mendelssohn,  and  he  admitted 
that  his  own  Pragmatic  theories  were  paralleled  by 
the  Jerusalem.  He  promised  to  write  on  the  sub- 
ject, but  death  claimed  him  all  too  soon.  Whether 
we  agree  with  Mendelssohn  or  not,  let  us  at  least 
agree  in  appreciation  of  his  genius.  What  he  did, 
and  what  we  do  not  do,  is  to  face  unflinchingly  the 
discussion  of  fundamentals.  Reading  Mendels- 
sohn is  to  breathe  the  fresh  air.  But  there's  the 
rub!  Read  Mendelssohn?  How,  if  we  know  no 
German?  It  is  deplorable  that  the  Jerusalem  is 
no  longer  accessible  in  English.  I  say  no  longer, 
because  once  it  was  accessible.  And  not  once  only, 
but  twice. 

In  1852,  Isaac  Leeser  published  an  English  ver- 
sion in  Philadelphia.  No  wonder  our  American 
brothers  still  hold  Leeser  in  such  reverent  esteem. 
Hfe  deserved  well  of  the  Jewry  of  his  land.  But 

182 


MENDELSSOHN'S  "  JERUSALEM  " 

Leeser's  was  not  the  first  English  translation  of 
Jerusalem.  In  1838,  M.  Samuels  issued  in  two 
volumes  an  English  version  in  London ;  it  was  dedi- 
cated to  Isaac  Lyon  Goldsmid,  and  contained  much 
besides  the  Jerusalem.  I  know  nothing  of  the 
translator  except  one  thing  that  he  was  not,  and 
another  thing  that  he  was.  He  was  not  a  native 
Englishman,  and  he  was  a  good  scholar.  About  a 
dozen  years  earlier  (1825)  he  had  produced  a 
volume,  entitled  "  Memoirs  of  Moses  Mendel- 
sohn "  (what  a  pitfall  that  double  s  is  to  printers! 
Throughout  M.  Samuels'  earlier  book  an  s  is  miss- 
ing in  the  name ;  in  the  later  publication  it  has  been 
recovered).  Samuels  asserts  himself  a  "disciple 
of  the  leading  system  of  the  work  " ;  perhaps  this 
accounts  for  his  enthusiasm,  shown  in  his  conscien- 
tious annotations,  which  are  fragrant  with  genuine 
Jewish  thought.  With  very  slight  furbishing  up, 
Samuels'  rendering  could  be  re-printed  to-day.  One 
of  the  most  urgent  needs  of  our  age  in  English- 
speaking  lands  is  that  Jews  should  once  more  be- 
come familiar  with  the  thought  of  the  eighteenth 
century,  and  particularly  of  Mendelssohn.  Like 
many  another  of  my  generation,  I  was  brought  up 
rather  to  decry  him.  I  have  learned  better  now, 
and  would  fain  urge  others  to  a  like  reconsidera- 
tion. 183 


HERDER'S  ANTHOLOGY 

Johann  Gottfried  von  Herder  belonged  to  the 
school  of  Rousseau.  The  latter,  from  whom  the 
French  Revolution  derived  its  philosophy,  was 
enamored  of  the  primitive  and  the  ancient.  Nature 
began  far  better  than  she  became  after  man  mis- 
handled her.  Herder  (1744-1803)  plays  on  the 
word  "  simplicity."  He  loved  the  Hebrew  poetry 
because  it  was  so  spontaneous,  so  untainted  by  arti- 
ficiality. Herder's  work  on  the  Spirit  of  Hebrew 
Poetry  (1772-3)  is  fairly  characterized  by  Graetz 
when  he  terms  it  epoch-making.  Herder  was 
among  the  first  of  the  moderns  to  rouse  interest  in 
the  Bible  as  literature.  What  his  contemporary 
Lessing  did  in  Germany  for  Shakespeare,  Herder 
did  for  the  Psalter. 

Now  Herder's  treatment  of  ancient  literature 
rendered  a  lasting  service  despite  his  fundamental 
misconception.  What  James  Sully  calls  Herder's 
"  excessive  and  sentimental  interest  in  primitive 
human  culture  "  prepared  the  way  for  the 
"  genetic  "  theories  of  our  time.  He  thoroughly 

184 


HERDER'S  ANTHOLOGY 

realized  the  natural  element  in  national  poetry.  He 
explained  genius  in  terms  of  race.  To  him  is  due 
some  part  of  the  conception  of  a  "  Jewish  culture," 
as  formulated  by  present-day  Zionists  of  Ahad 
ha-'Am's  school.  It  is  rather  curious  that  while, 
on  the  one  hand,  Herder's  theories  helped  national 
anti-Semitism,  on  the  other  hand,  they  gave  sug- 
gestions to  national  Judaism.  By  laying  undue 
stress  on  the  natural,  Herder  exaggerated  the 
national  in  the  human  spirit.  In  his  early  manhood 
Herder  had  thought  of  training  as  a  physician. 
But  he  abandoned  the  idea  because  he  could  not 
endure  the  dissecting-room.  When  he  came  to  dis- 
cuss the  world's  genius  he  used  the  scalpel  freely 
enough.  His  gorge  rose  against  cutting  up  the 
body,  but  he  felt  no  reluctance  to  dissect  the  spirit. 
Earlier  writers  had  overlooked  the  national  ele- 
ment in  the  Bible.  Herder  saw  in  the  Old  Testa- 
ment nothing  but  national  songs.  The  thought 
often  led  him  right.  He  strongly  opposed,  for  in- 
stance, the  mystic  and  allegorical  interpretations  of 
the  Song  of  Songs.  To  him  it  was  a  love  poem,  the 
purest,  most  delicate  love  poem  of  antiquity  ("  den 
reinsten  und  zartesten  Liebesdichtung  des  Alter- 
tums").  Hebrew  literature  was  national,  but  it 
revealed  its  nationality  under  unique  conditions, 

185 


BY-PATHS  IN  HEBRAIC  BOOKLAND 

for  it  was  marked  by  the  "  poetic  consciousness  of 
God."  In  all  this  Herder  was  magnificently  right. 
But  he  could  not  leave  well  alone.  In  one  of  his 
latest  essays  he  summed  up  the  Hebrew  poetry  as 
distinguished  indeed  by  religiosity,  but  also  by  sim- 
plicity ("  kindliche  Naivetat,  Religiositat,  Ein- 
falt  ") .  No  term  could  be  worse  chosen.  Hebrew 
poetry  shows  consummate  art.  If  it  conveys  the 
sense  of  simplicity,  it  is  because  the  poet's  art  so 
thoroughly  conceals  its  workings.  Herder  made 
aesthetically  the  same  mistake  as  Wellhausen  per- 
petrated theologically.  According  to  Wellhausen, 
the  prophets  of  the  eighth  century  before  the  Chris- 
tian era  suddenly  appeared  as  an  utterly  new  phe- 
nomenon on  the  Hebraic  horizon,  whereas,  in  truth, 
by  the  time  we  reach  Amos  we  have  got  to  a  very 
advanced  stage  in  the  religious  history  of  Israel. 
So,  too,  is  it  with  the  biblical  poetry.  It  is,  even  in 
its  earliest  fragments,  such  as  the  Song  of  Deb- 
orah, a  highly  cultivated  form.  "  Simplicity  " 
is  the  last  word  to  apply  to  it.  It  is  powerful,  it 
is  sincere,  but  it  is  not  naive.  The  Greek  athlete 
who  conquered  at  the  Olympic  games  was  robust, 
but  he  had  gone  through  a  long  process  of  train- 
ing. Vigor  is  not  synonymous  with  artlessness. 
Trench  wrote  a  charming  book  on  the  "  use  of 

186 


HERDER'S  ANTHOLOGY 

words."  An  equally  entertaining  book  could  be 
compiled  on  the  "  misuse  of  words."  In  such  a 
book,  a  front  place  would  be  assignable  to  Herder's 
"  simplicity." 

What  distinguished  Hebrew  poetry  was  not  that 
element  which  it  derived  from  the  narrowing  fet- 
ters of  locality  and  epoch.  Why  is  the  Bible  the 
most  translatable  book?  Why  has  it  been  found 
the  easiest  of  the  great  classics  to  re-express  in  the 
manifold  tongues  of  man?  Because  it  is  so  inde- 
pendent of  the  very  qualities  by  which  Herder 
sought  to  explain  it!  The  poetry  of  Israel  was 
"  natural  "  and  "  national  "  in  the  sense  that  it  cor- 
responded to  human  nature,  and  was  susceptible  of 
interpretation  in  terms  of  every  nationality.  Over 
Herder's  tomb  was  inscribed  the  legend  "  Licht, 
Liebe,  Leben."  Herder  might  have  inscribed  these 
or  similar  words  over  certain  of  the  gems  of 
Hebrew  literature.  "  Light,  love,  life "  are  a 
truer  characterization  than  "  naiveness,  religiosity, 
simplicity." 

Graetz  thought  that,  though  Herder  dreamed  of 
the  time  when  Jew  and  Gentile  would  understand 
and  appreciate  each  other,  he  was  ill-disposed  to 
the  Jews.  He  was,  it  is  true,  not  one  of  those  who 
fell  under  the  spell  of  Moses  Mendelssohn's  per- 

187 


BY-PATHS  IN  HEBRAIC  BOOKLAND 

sohality.  He  was  disinclined  to  subject  himself  to 
the  spell.  When  Mendelssohn  sought  Herder's 
acquaintance,  the  latter  received  the  proposal 
coldly.  This  was  not  necessarily  due  to  unkind- 
ness.  It  seems  to  me  that  Herder,  who  much  ad- 
mired Lessing,  was  rather  resentful  of  the  close 
intimacy  between  the  hero  and  the  author  of 
Nathan  the  Wise.  Herder  had  no  desire  to  form 
one  of  a  menage  a  trois.  As  Graetz  adds,  Men- 
delssohn and  Herder  did  come  closely  together 
after  Lessing's  death.  Herder,  in  one  of  his  es- 
says, dated  1781,  the  very  year  in  which  Lessing 
passed  away,  pays  Mendelssohn  a  pretty  compli- 
ment, praising  him  as  an  exponent  of  Jewish  ideals. 
Herder's  essay  was  prefixed  to  his  "  Anthology 
from  Eastern  Poets  "  (Blumenlese  aus  morgen- 
Idndische  Dichtern] .  Few  of  us  remember  that 
the  word  Anthology  corresponds  exactly  with 
Blumenlese;  it  means  a  "  collection  of  flowers." 
(Compare  Graetz's  Leket  Shoshannim.)  Fore- 
most among  the  floral  graces  of  Herder's  Oriental 
garland  are  the  famous  selections  made  from 
the  Talmud  and  Midrash.  Here,  as  elsewhere, 
Herder  was  rather  too  inclined  to  treat  the  rab- 
binical legend  and  parable  as  "  naive."  He  was, 
moreover,  a  little  patronizing  to  the  Haggadists 

188 


HERDER'S  ANTHOLOGY 

when  he  declared  that  "  people  laughed  at  what 
they  did  not  understand  " — referring  to  the  sup- 
posed grotesqueness  of  some  of  the  rabbinic 
modes  of  expression.  But  he  was  happier  when  he 
described  vandals  like  Eisenmenger  as  men  who 
"  rough-handled  the  butterfly,  and  who,  mangling 
the  beauteous  creature  between  their  coarse  fingers, 
wondered  that  all  they  found  on  their  hands  was  a 
particle  of  dust."  No  one  has  ever  translated  rab- 
binic parables  so  successfully  as  Herder.  His  very 
love  for  the  unfamiliar  stood  him  in  good  stead. 
He  does  not  tell  us  whence  he  derived  his  knowl- 
edge of  the  originals.  Probably  it  was  in  oral 
intercourse  with  Jews.  Such  a  spelling  of  Lilit  as 
Lilts  looks  as  though  he  heard  it  pronounced  by  a 
German  Jew. 

Be  that  as  it  may,  Herder  enters  into  the  spirit  of 
the  rabbinic  apologues  with  rare  understanding. 
He  chose  the  subjects  with  judgment,  and  executed 
the  renderings  with  felicity.  There  could  have 
been  nothing  but  love  for  Judaism  in  the  man  who 
thus  selected  and  who  thus  translated.  Graetz  was 
unduly  hard  on  him.  It  was  quite  possible  for  a 
man  to  be  fond  of  Jews  and  yet  not  drawn  to  Men- 
delssohn. The  last-named  fascinated  so  many  that 
he  could  afford  to  find  one  person  antipathetic — if 

189 


BY-PATHS  IN  HEBRAIC  BOOKLAND 

indeed  he  was  so.  Long  before  others  took  to  a 
cult  of  the  rabbinic  wit  and  wisdom,  long  before 
Emanuel  Deutsch  startled  the  English  world  in 
October,  1867,  by  his  question  in  the  Quarterly  Re- 
view: "  What  is  the  Talmud  ?  ",  Herder  had  intro- 
duced the  German  world  to  it,  and  had  in  part 
answered  Deutsch's  question  by  anticipation.  From 
several  points  of  view,  therefore,  Herder  is  of  im- 
port for  the  Jewish  student  of  nineteenth  century 
history. 


190 


WALKER'S  "  THEODORE  CYPHON  " 

Cumberland's  play,  The  Jew,  appeared  in  1794, 
and  two  years  later  was  published  Theodore 
Cyphon,  The  author  was  George  Walker,  a  book- 
seller of  London  and  a  prolific  writer  of  novels. 
His  works  are  a  curious  compound  of  wild  melo- 
dramatic incident  with  comments,  often  shrewd 
enough,  on  social  and  political  actualities. 

Theodore  Cyphon  well  represents  Walker's 
method.  The  main  plot  is  a  tiresome  story,  told 
in  retrospect,  of  Theodore's  heroism  and  misfor- 
tunes in  several  walks  of  life,  from  the  Minories  to 
Arabia.  He  ends  on  the  scaffold  for  an  offence 
which  was  in  truth  his  noblest  act  of  chivalry.  In 
between  we  have  a  quite  able  discussion  on  the 
cruelty  of  inflicting  capital  punishment  in  cases  of 
mere  robbery.  The  author  concludes  his  Preface 
with  the  fear  that  readers  may  exclaim :  "  Well,  it 
was  very  tragical;  but  I  am  glad  the  hero  is  set- 
tled at  last."  That,  at  least,  is  the  sentiment  of  a 
modern  reader. 

This  novel  of  Walker's,  however,  arrests  atten- 
tion by  being  set  in  a  Jewish  frame.  The  term 

191 


BY-PATHS  IN  HEBRAIC  BOOKLAND 

frame  is  used  advisedly,  since  the  main  narrative  is 
independent  of  the  setting. 

The  full  title  of  the  book  is  Theodore  Cyphon, 
or  the  Benevolent  Jew.  There  were  two  editions 
of  it.  The  first  came  out  in  1796,  the  second  in 
1823.  Of  the  second  edition  the  British  Museum 
possesses  a  complete  copy;  of  the  first  edition  an 
imperfect  example — consisting  of  the  first  of  the 
three  volumes — has  recently  been  presented  to  the 
University  Library,  Cambridge.  The  "  benevolent 
Jew  "  is  one  Shechem  Bensadi,  and  he  is  drawn 
with  more  than  sympathy.  Shechem  lends  money 
at  exorbitant  rates  to  the  improvident  aristocracy, 
and  devotes  his  gains  to  the  relief  of  deserving 
unfortunates.  Nay,  his  clients  are  not  always  de- 
serving. When  robbed,  Shechem  refuses  to  prose- 
cute; he  showers  favors  on  those  who  treat  him 
despitefully.  His  philanthropy  is  extended  to  Jew 
and  Gentile  alike.  There  is  one  remarkable  scene 
in  the  fifth  chapter,  in  which  Shechem  is  shown  in 
a  large  storehouse,  surrounded  by  scores  of  poor 
Jews  to  whom  he  supplies  goods,  thus  enabling  them 
to  earn  a  livelihood.  In  equally  striking  chapters 
Shechem  plays  the  role  of  benefactor  and  friend 
to  others  than  his  own  coreligionists. 

The  first  edition  of  Theodore  Cyphon  was  obvi- 

192 


WALKER'S  "  THEODORE  CYPHON  " 

ously  suggested  by  Cumberland's  success.  Curi- 
ously enough,  the  sub-title,  The  Benevolent  Jew, 
is  used  in  the  sheet  concerning  Cumberland's  play 
printed  in  vol.  vii  of  the  Transactions  of  the  Jew- 
ish Historical  Society  of  England,  p.  177.  It  is  not 
improbable  that  the  second  edition  of  Theodore 
Cyphon  was  due  to  the  popularity  of  Scott's  Ivan- 
hoe,  which  was  published  in  December,  1819. 
There  are  not  wanting  some  superficial  parallels  be- 
tween Scott's  masterpiece  and  Walker's  earlier  and 
more  moderate  production.  Eve,  Shechem's 
daughter,  nurses  Walker's  hero,  just  as  Isaac's 
daughter  Rebecca  nurses  Scott's  hero.  The  most 
interesting  parallel — perhaps  the  only  real  one — is 
presented  in  two  scenes,  one  in  Ivanhoe,  the  other  in 
Theodore  Cyphon.  The  first  is  the  occasion  on 
which  Rebecca  sings  her  famous  hymn.  Scott  de- 
scribes his  poem  as  a  "  translation  "  of  a  hymn  with 
which  the  evening  ritual  of  the  Synagogue  con- 
cluded. It  is  really  an  original  composition  inspired 
by  various  scriptural  texts,  and  in  its  turn  may  have 
suggested  some  great  lines  in  Kipling's  Recessional. 
Is  it  possible  that  Scott's  idea  of  Rebecca's  hymn 
was  suggested  by  Walker?  For,  in  the  second 
scene  alluded  to  above,  Eve,  tco,  is  overheard 
singing  a  song  to  "  music  wild,  yet  so  soft." 
13  193 


BY-PATHS  IN  HEBRAIC  BOOKLAND 

Walker  gives  us  only  the  last  stanza  of  Eve's 
song,  which  runs  thus  (p.  46  of  vol.  i  of  the  1796 
edition)  : 

The  wand'rers  of  Israel,  through  nations  dispers'd, 

Shall  again  dwell  in  safety,  again  rest  in  peace; 
And  the  harp,  that  so  plaintive  our  sorrows  rehears'd, 

Shall  thrill  with  new  pleasures,  as  pleasures  increase; 
The  sweet,  spicy  shrubs,  that  wave  over  the  hills, 

Untouch'd  by  the  simoom,  eternally  blow, 
Frankincense  and  myrrh  from  their  bosom  distils, 

And  love  shall  attend  on  our  path  as  we  go. 

Scott,  of  course,  had  other  models  beside  Walker. 
Byron's  Hebrew  Melodies  came  out  both  with  and 
without  Nathan's  musical  accompaniment,  in  1815, 
four  years  before  Ivanhoe  was  written.  It  is  curi- 
ous, by  the  way,  to  note  that  Rudolf  Eric  Raspe, 
the  original  of  the  character  whom  Scott  so  merci- 
lessly caricatures  as  Dousterswivel  in  his  novel 
The  Antiquary,  was  not  only  the  author  of  Baron 
Miinchausen,  but  was  also  the  first  translator  into 
English  of  Lessing's  Nathan  der  Weise  (London, 
1781).  Scott  does  not  seem  to  have  been  ac- 
quainted with  Lessing's  play,  either  in  the  original 
or  in  translation.  Scott's  indebtedness  to  Marlowe, 
on  the  other  hand,  has  already  been  pointed  out  by 
the  present  writer. 

194 


WALKER'S  "  THEODORE  CYPHON  " 

Having  drawn  attention  to  the  parallel  between 
Walker  and  Scott,  it  will  be  useful  to  note  an 
equally  striking  contrast  On  pages  110-112  of 
Theodore  Cyphon  occurs  the  passage : 

"  His  chief  concern  was  for  Eve,  whom  he  saw, 
notwithstanding  Theodore's  supposed  engage- 
ments, and  the  restrictions  of  religion,  still  encour- 
age sentiments  which  sapped  the  foundation  of  her 
happiness,  and  which  no  expedient  offered  to  re- 
move, but  by  parting  with  its  object,  or  suffering 
their  marriage  spite  of  religion  and  law. 

'  Though  a  Jew,  skilled  in  the  learning  of  the 
Talmud  and  Mosaic  law,  he  was  without  those 
prejudices  that  attend  on  superstition.  He  saw 
clearly  that,  when  those  precepts  were  first  insti- 
tuted, they  were  designed  as  a  prevention  of  com- 
munication between  the  Israelite  and  Heathen,  lest 
by  the  influence  and  interchange  of  the  softer  sex, 
they  might  be  led  into  the  practice  of  idolatry.  Yet 
now,  taking  up  the  argument  in  a  religious  way, 
the  danger  existed  no  longer;  both  Jew  and  Chris- 
tian agreeing  in  the  chief  article  of  worship,  though 
divided  about  what  the  understanding  of  neither 
can  comprehend.  In  a  civil  light,  man  was  created 
for  the  society  of  man.  The  distinction  of  king- 
dom and  people  were  childish,  and  fit  only  to  insult 

195 


BY-PATHS  IN  HEBRAIC  BOOKLAND 

the  understanding.  But  whilst  he  indulged  himself 
in  these  speculations,  he  avoided  hinting  to  Eve 
that  there  was  a  possibility  she  should  ever  become 
the  wife  of  Theodore,  that  the  unattainability  of 
the  object  might  blunt  or  destroy  the  ardour  of 
hope :  for  however  he  might  have  wished  for  such 
a  character  (so  far  as  observation  could  judge)  as 
his  son-in-law,  under  the  present  circumstances  he 
could  not  have  allowed  it,  had  even  the  affections 
of  Theodore  been  placed  upon  her,  which  he  be- 
lieved was  far  from  the  case,  as  the  observation  he 
had  made  when  he  entered  his  chamber  abruptly, 
and  the  words,  '  O  Eliza,'  which  his  daughter  had 
heard,  led  him  to  conclude  some  prior  engagement 
retained  him." 

The  sequel  shows  that  Theodore  is  already  mar- 
ried to  Eliza.  With  Walker's  view,  however,  as  to 
such  a  marriage,  it  is  fruitful  to  compare  the  noble 
passage,  on  the  same  subject,  with  which  Scott  con- 
cludes the  preface  to  the  1830  edition  of  Ivanhoe: 

"  The  character  of  the  fair  Jewess  found  so 
much  favour  in  the  eyes  of  some  fair  readers,  that 
the  writer  was  censured,  because,  when  arranging 
the  fates  of  the  characters  of  the  drama,  he  had 
not  assigned  the  hand  of  Wilfred  to  Rebecca, 
rather  than  to  the  less  interesting  Rowena.  But, 

196 


WALKER'S  "  THEODORE  CYPHON  " 

not  to  mention  that  the  prejudices  of  the  age  ren- 
dered such  an  union  almost  impossible,  the  author 
may,  in  passing,  observe  that  he  thinks  a  character 
of  a  highly  virtuous  and  lofty  stamp  is  degraded 
rather  than  exalted  by  an  attempt  to  reward  virtue 
with  temporal  prosperity.  Such  is  not  the  recom- 
pense which  Providence  has  deemed  worthy  of  suf- 
fering merit,  and  it  is  a  dangerous  and  fatal 
doctrine  to  teach  young  persons,  the  most  common 
readers  of  romance,  that  rectitude  of  conduct  and 
of  principle  are  either  naturally  allied  with,  or  ade- 
quately rewarded  by,  the  gratification  of  our  pas- 
sions, or  attainment  of  our  wishes.  In  a  word,  if  a 
virtuous  and  self-denied  character  is  dismissed  with 
temporal  wealth,  greatness,  rank,  or  the  indulgence 
of  such  a  rashly-formed  or  ill-assorted  passion  as 
that  of  Rebecca  for  Ivanhoe,  the  reader  will  be 
apt  to  say,  Verily,  virtue  has  had  its  reward.  But  a 
glance  on  the  great  picture  of  life  will  show,  that 
the  duties  of  self-denial,  or  the  sacrifice  of  passion 
to  principle,  are  seldom  thus  remunerated;  and 
that  the  internal  consciousness  of  their  high-minded 
discharge  of  duty  produces  on  their  own  reflections 
a  more  adequate  recompense,  in  the  form  of  that 
peace  which  the  world  cannot  give  or  take  away." 

197 


BY-PATHS  IN  HEBRAIC  BOOKLAND 

From  the  artistic  point  of  view,  Walker's  novel 
has  little  merit.  But  it  deserves  to  be  better  known 
from  the  historical  point  of  view.  It  was  another 
expression  of  the  new  attitude  towards  the  Jew, 
which  began  to  distinguish  English  letters  in  the 
latter  part  of  the  eighteenth  century. 


198 


HORACE  SMITH  OF  THE  "REJECTED 
ADDRESSES  " 

Horace  Smith  and  his  brother  James  are  famous 
as  the  joint  authors  of  the  most  successful  parody 
ever  perpetrated.  Drury  Lane  Theatre  was  re- 
opened on  October  10,  1812,  having  been  rebuilt 
after  the  fire  which  destroyed  it  some  three  years 
previously.  The  Committee  advertised  a  compe- 
tition for  the  best  address  to  be  spoken  at  the  re- 
opening. It  is  easy  to  imagine  what  occurred. 
Masses  of  poems  were  sent  in,  and  in  despair  all  of 
them  were  rejected,  and  Byron  was  invited  to 
write  a  prologue.  It  occurred  to  the  Smiths  to  pro- 
duce a  series  of  parodies  in  the  style  of  the  poets 
of  their  day.  They  pretended  that  all,  or  most  of 
them,  had  been  candidates  for  the  prize,  and  on 
the  very  day  of  the  re-opening  was  published  the 
volume  of  Rejected  Addresses,  which,  conceived, 
executed,  printed,  and  published  within  the  space 
of  six  weeks,  continues  in  the  general  judgment  of 
critics  the  finest  jeu  d' esprit  of  its  kind. 

Interesting  enough  it  would  be  to  linger  over  the 
general  aspects  of  this  book.  We  must,  neverthe- 

199 


BY-PATHS  IN  HEBRAIC  BOOKLAND^ 

less,  resist  the  temptation  to  recall  the  marvellous 
imitations  of  that  genial  friend  of  ours,  the  author 
of  Ivanhoe — or  of  that  crabbed  foe  of  Jewish 
emancipation,  William  Cobbett.  Capital,  too,  is 
the  skit  on  Thomas  Moore.  Eve  and  the  apple 
come  into  that  effusion  as  a  matter  of  course.  To 
Moore,  Eve  was  as  Charles'  head  to  Mr.  Dick. 
One  could  compile  a  fair-sized  volume  out  of  the 
Irish  sentimentalist's  allusions  to  the  first  pair  in 
Paradise.  Moore  used  the  allusion  seriously  and 
humorously.  In  the  Lives  of  the  Angels,  Adam  is 
driven  not  from  but  into  Paradise,  for  as  Eve  had 
to  go,  it  would  have  been  the  reverse  of  bliss  for 
him  to  be  left  behind  in  Eden.  In  another  poem, 
Moore  plays  on  the  rabbinic  suggestion  that  woman 
was  made  out  of  the  man's  tail,  and  so,  comments 
the  poet,  man  ever  after  has  followed  the  original 
plan,  and  leaves  his  wife  behind  him  whenever  he 
can.  Again  and  again,  Moore  in  his  poems  claims 
close  acquaintance  with  rabbinic  lore,  of  which,  in 
fact,  he  knew  only  a  few  scraps  from  second-hand 
sources. 

So  we  might  continue  to  glean  thoughts  from 
Rejected  Addresses.  It  needs  gleaning,  because 
the  direct  references  to  contemporary  Jews  are  very 
few.  This  negative  point  is  not  without  interest.  A 

200 


HORACE  SMITH  OF  THE  "  REJECTED  ADDRESSES " 

dramatic  squib  nowadays  would  almost  certainly 
have  its  hits  against  Jews.  The  Smiths  only  once 
refer  to  a  Jew — the  unfortunate  Lyon  Levi  or 
Levy,  who  committed  suicide  by  flinging  himself 
over  the  London  Monument.  He  was  a  merchant 
of  Haydon  Square,  and  the  newspapers  of  January 
19,  1810,  record  the  event  as  having  occurred  on 
the  previous  day.  It  is  not  surprising  that  the  inci- 
dent should  be  fresh  in  men's  minds  when  the 
Smiths  wrote  three  years  later.  For  after  an  inter- 
val of  thirty-seven  years,  we  again  find  an  allusion 
to  it  in  the  Ingoldsby  Legends.  Levi  was  neither 
the  first  nor  the  last  to  precipitate  himself  from  the 
summit  of  Wren's  column ;  eventually  the  top  was 
encaged,  to  bar  others  from  a  similar  temptation. 
It  was  remarked  above  that  the  Rejected  Ad- 
dresses were  absolutely  free  from  anti-Jewish 
gibes.  Impossible  would  it  have  been  for  the 
Smiths  to  have  acted  otherwise.  Horace,  in  par- 
ticular, was  an  ardent  admirer  of  Richard  Cum- 
berland, writer  of  The  Jew,  which  at  the  end  of  the 
eighteenth  century  did  so  much  to  rehabilitate  the 
Jews  in  English  good-will.  We  can  see  Horace 
Smith's  tendency,  negatively,  in  one  of  his  other 
poems.  In  the  "  Culprit  and  the  Judge,"  he  deals 
with  a  case  of  coin-clipping  in  medieval  France. 

201 


BY-PATHS  IN  HEBRAIC  BOOKLAND 

As  with  all  of  Horace's  verses,  it  is  full  of  good 
points.  The  judge  denounced  as  profanation  the 
crime  of  filing  the  similitude  of  good  King  Pepin, 
and  ordered  the  offender  to  be  punished  with  de- 
capitation. This  is  the  clever  reply  of  the  culprit : 

"  As  to  offending  powers  divine," 

The  culprit  cried, — "  be  nothing  said : 

Yours  is  a  deeper  guilt  than  mine. 
I  took  a  portion  from  the  head 

Of  the  King's  image ;  you,  oh  fearful  odds ! 

Strike  the  whole  head  at  once  from  God's!" 

One  wonders  whether  the  author  had  ever  heard 
of  the  closely  parallel  idea  of  the  ancient  Rabbi, 
who  denounced  the  murderer  as  one  who  dimin- 
ished the  divine  image  in  which  man  had  been 
made.  Observe,  however,  how  Horace  Smith  re- 
frains from  making  cheap  capital  out  of  the  joke 
by  describing  the  offender  as  a  Jew.  Smith  knew 
the  truth  too  well.  He  knew  that,  though  some 
Jews  were  given  to  coin-clipping,  there  were  many 
offenders  who  were  not  Jews.  It  is  absolutely 
characteristic  of  Horace  Smith  that  he  should  have 
refrained  from  libelling  all  Jews  for  the  sins  of 
some. 

Horace  Smith  was,  as  already  suggested,  actu- 
ated in  his  philo-Semitism  by  knowledge.  And 

202 


HORACE  SMITH  OF  THE  "  REJECTED  ADDRESSES " 

this  is  the  reason  why,  though  his  brother  James 
wrote  some  of  the  best  of  the  parodies  in  Rejected 
Addresses,  this  present  article  deals  less  with  him 
than  with  Horace.  For  that  the  latter  knew  and 
understood  Judaism  can  be  demonstrated  by  the 
clearest  evidence.  In  1831  he  published  a  prose 
volume,  which  ought  to  be  better  known  to  English 
Jews  than  it  is.  The  title  is  "  Festivals,  Games, 
and  Amusements,  Ancient  and  Modern."  The 
second  chapter  deals  with  the  ancient  Jews.  It  re- 
veals an  almost  perfect  insight  into  the  Jewish  con- 
ception of  life.  Only  one  or  two  passages  require 
amendment  to  make  it  quite  perfect.  I  need  not 
expound,  it  will  suffice  to  quote  a  single  passage : 

"  It  is  worthy  of  remark  that  the  government  he 
(Moses)  established,  the  only  one  claiming  a  divine 
author,  was  founded  on  the  most  democratical  and 
even  levelling  principles.  It  was  a  theocratical 
commonwealth,  having  the  Deity  Himself  for  its 
King.  Agriculture  was  the  basis  of  the  Mosaic 
polity;  all  the  husbandsmen  were  on  a  footing  of 
perfect  equality;  riches  conferred  no  permanent 
preeminence;  there  was  neither  peasantry  nor  no- 
bility, unless  the  Levites  may  be  considered  a  sort 
of  priestly  aristocracy,  for  they  were  entitled  by 
their  birth  to  certain  privileges.  But  this  is  foreign 

203 


BY-PATHS  IN  HEBRAIC  BOOKLAND 

to  our  purpose.  The  most  distinguishing  features 
of  the  government  were  the  vigilant,  the  most 
anxious  provisions  made  for  the  interests,  enjoy- 
ments, and  festivals  of  the  nation;  and  that  en- 
larged wisdom  and  profound  knowledge  of  human 
nature,  which  led  the  inspired  founder  of  the 
Hebrew  commonwealth  to  exalt  and  sanctify  the 
pleasures  of  the  people  by  uniting  them  with  re- 
ligion, while  he  confirmed  and  endeared  religion 
by  combining  it  with  all  the  popular  gratifications." 
When  Sir  Walter  Scott  saw  the  verses  attributed 
to  him  in  Rejected  Addresses,  he  exclaimed:  "  I 
certainly  must  have  written  this  myself,  though  I 
forget  on  what  occasion."  Some  of  us  might  say 
the  same  of  certain  of  the  phrases  in  the  passage 
just  quoted.  The  joyousness  of  Judaism  has  not 
been  asserted  with  more  sureness  of  touch  by  any 
Jewish  writer  than  it  was  by  Horace  Smith.  In 
another  part  of  his  book,  he  misconceived  the  atti- 
tude of  the  Pentateuch  to  the  non-Jew,  but  other- 
wise he  well  understood  Moses  and  the  Law. 


204 


PART  IV 


PART  IV 

BYRON'S  "  HEBREW  MELODIES  " 

No  selection  from  Byron's  poetry  is  complete 
unless  it  contain  some  of  the  "  Hebrew  Melodies." 
Matthew  Arnold  included  five  of  the  twenty-three 
pieces;  Bulwer  Lytton  adopted  them  all.  Swin- 
burne, it  is  true,  gave  us  a  volume  of  selections 
without  a  Hebrew  melody  in  it,  but  curiously 
enough  he  admits  the  verses  beginning:  "  They  say 
that  Hope  is  happiness,"  which,  it  would  seem, 
were  intended  for  the  melodies,  though  they  do  not 
appear  among  them.  Nathan  duly  adds  the  lines 
to  his  collection,  where  they  form  the  last  item  of 
the  fourth  and  final  "  Number."  The  musician 
also  includes  "  Francesca,"  and,  on  the  other  hand, 
omits  the  "  Song  of  Saul  before  his  Last  Battle." 

The  "  Melodies  "  first  came  out  with  settings 
by  the  Jewish  musician,  Isaac  Nathan.  The  tunes, 
partly  derived  from  the  Synagogue,  were  not 
well  chosen;  hence,  though  the  poems  have  sur- 
vived, the  settings  are  forgotten.  In  the  same 
year  (1815),  John  Murray  also  published  the 

207 


BY-PATHS  IN  HEBRAIC  BOOKLAND 

verses  without  the  music.  Before  consenting  to  this 
step,  Byron  wrote  to  Nathan  for  permission  to  take 
it.  He  wished,  he  said,  to  oblige  Mr.  Murray,  but 
"  you  know,  Nathan,  it  is  against  all  good  fashion 
to  give  and  take  back.  I  therefore  cannot  grant 
what  is  not  at  my  disposal."  Nathan  readily  con- 
sented, and  the  volume  of  poems  was  issued  with 
this  Preface :  "  The  subsequent  poems  were  writ- 
ten at  the  request  of  the  author's  friend,  the  Hon. 
D.  Kinnaird,  for  a  selection  of  Hebrew  melodies, 
and  have  been  published  with  the  music  arranged 
by  Mr.  Braham  and  Mr.  Nathan."  In  point  of 
fact,  Braham  had  nothing  to  do  with  the  musical 
arrangement.  Though  his  name  is  associated  with 
Nathan's  on  the  title  page  of  the  original  edition, 
it  is  removed  in  the  reprints. 

It  has  been  said  above  that  the  musical  setting 
has  not  retained  its  hold  on  public  taste.  The 
Rev.  Francis  L.  Cohen  (in  the  Jewish  Encyclo- 
pedia, vol.  ix,  p.  179)  speaks  of  it  as  having  "  de- 
servedly sunk  into  oblivion."  I  have  recently  had 
several  of  them  played  over  to  me,  and  my  verdict 
is  the  same  as  Mr.  Cohen's.  In  themselves  the 
tunes  are  sometimes  good  enough,  Maoz  Zur  ap- 
pears among  them.  But  the  words  and  the  airs 
rarely  fit,  and  Nathan  lost  chances  by  ignoring  the 

208 


yb  hi  IhJ'sSitw  J<v  JNirt  Strert  (Pfwrt 


TITLE-PAGE  OF  THE  FIRST  EDITION  OF  BYRON'S 
"HEBREW  MELODIES" 


BYRON'S  "  HEBREW  MELODIES  " 

Sephardic  music.  Nathan's  contemporaries  had, 
however,  a  higher  opinion  of  the  work.  Perhaps 
it  was  because  the  composer  sang  his  songs  so  well; 
Braham  does  not  seem  to  have  included  them  in  his 
repertoire.  But  Nathan's  auditors  were  charmed 
by  his  renderings.  Byron  himself  was  most  moved 
by  "  She  Walks  in  Beauty  " — to  a  modern  ear 
Nathan's  is  a  commonplace  and  inappropriate 
setting — and  "  he  would  not  unfrequently  join  in 
its  execution."  The  verses  were  really  written  for 
the  tunes,  and  the  poet  often  consulted  the  musi- 
cian as  to  the  style  and  metre  of  the  stanzas. 
Nathan  (in  his  Fugitive  Pieces,  1829),  records 
many  conversations  during  the  progress  of  the  joint 
work.  He  tells  us,  for  instance,  how  Byron  re- 
fused to  alter  the  end  of  "  Jephtha's  Daughter." 
As  Nathan  read  the  Scripture,  and  as  many  others 
also  read  it,  Jephthah's  daughter  did  not  perish  as 
a  consequence  of  her  father's  vow;  but  Byron  ob- 
served: "  Do  not  seek  to  exhume  the  lady."  On 
another  occasion,  Nathan  was  anxious  to  know 
what  biblical  passages  were  in  the  poet's  mind 
when  he  wrote  some  of  the  verses,  such  as 
"  O  snatch'd  away  in  beauty's  bloom !  "  Byron 
vaguely  answered:  "  Every  mind  must  make  its 
own  reference."  The  local  color  of  the  poems, 
14  209 


BY-PATHS  IN  HEBRAIC  BOOKLAND 

besides  their  substance,  is  in  fact  sometimes  at  fault. 
"  Each  flower  the  dews  have  lightly  wet,"  is  not  a 
Palestinian  touch;  the  dews  there  are  remarkable 
for  their  heaviness. 

At  this  point  let  us  for  a  moment  interrupt 
Nathan's  reminiscences  of  Byron  himself,  and  cite 
what  he  tells  us  of  another  famous  poet's  appre- 
ciation of  the  "  Melodies."  "  When  the  Hebrew 
melodies  were  first  published,"  says  Nathan,  "  Sir 
Walter,  then  Mr.  Scott,  honoured  me  with  a  visit 
at  my  late  residence  in  Poland  Street.  I  sang  sev- 
eral of  the  melodies  to  him — he  repeated  his  visit, 
and  requested  that  I  would  allow  him  to  introduce 
his  lady  and  his  daughter.  They  came  together, 
when  I  had  the  pleasure  of  singing  to  them 
1  Jephtha's  Daughter,'  and  one  or  two  more  of  the 
favourite  airs:  they  entered  into  the  spirit  of  the 
music  with  all  the  true  taste  and  feeling  so  peculiar 
to  the  Scotch."  Another  admirer  of  Nathan's 
singing  of  the  melodies  was  Lady  Caroline  Lamb, 
herself  the  author  of  what  the  conventions  of  the 
period  would  have  termed  "  elegant  verses."  Once 
she  wrote  to  Nathan:  "  I  am,  and  have  been,  very 
ill ;  it  would  perhaps  cure  me  if  you  could  come  and 
sing  to  me  '  Oh  Mariamne  ' — now  will  you?  I  en- 
treat you,  the  moment  you  have  this  letter  come  and 

210 


BYRON'S  "HEBREW  MELODIES" 

The  same  lady  translated  for  him  a 
Hebrew  elegy  which  he  wrote  on  the  death  of  his 
wife.  Nathan  must  obviously  have  been  an  ami- 
able companion  and  a  charming  Tenderer  of  his 
own  music,  or  he  would  not  have  gained  the  ap- 
plause of  these  distinguished  judges. 

As  has  been  seen  from  the  conversations  re- 
corded above,  Byron  and  Nathan  became  very  inti- 
mate in  the  course  of  their  collaboration  over  the 
"  Hebrew  Melodies."  It  was  this  work  that 
brought  them  together,  though  they  were  contem- 
poraries at  Cambridge  about  1805,  Byron  being 
a  student  at  Trinity  College,  and  Nathan  a  pupil 
at  Solomon  Lyon's  Jewish  school  in  Cambridge 
town.  But  they  naturally  did  not  become  acquainted 
then.  Douglas  Kinnaird  (according  to  Mr.  Pro- 
thero)  introduced  them  to  one  another.  Kinnaird 
was  Byron's  banker  and  Cambridge  friend.  This 
mention  of  Mr.  Prothero  reminds  me  that  in  his 
edition  of  Byron's  Letters,  he  cites  a  note  written 
by  the  poet  to  thank  Nathan  for  a  "  seasonable  be- 
quest "  of  a  parcel  of  matsos.  Byron  must  have 
grown  very  attached  to  Nathan.  An  officious  friend 
of  the  poet  exhorted  the  musician  to  bring  the  melo- 
dies out  in  good  style,  so  that  his  lordship's  name 
"  might  not  suffer  from  scantiness  in  their  publica- 

211 


BY-PATHS  IN  HEBRAIC  BOOKLAND 

tion."  Byron  overheard  the  remark,  and  on  the 
following  evening  said  to  Nathan:  "  Do  not  suffer 
that  capricious  fool  to  lead  you  into  more  expense 
than  is  absolutely  necessary;  bring  out  the  book  to 
your  own  taste.  I  have  no  ambition  to  gratify,  be- 
yond that  of  proving  useful  to  you."  The  poet 
was,  indeed,  so  indignant  that  he  generously  of- 
fered to  share  in  the  cost  of  production,  an  offer 
which  Nathan  as  generously  declined. 

Readers  of  the  "  Hebrew  Melodies  "  must  have 
been  struck  by  the  appearance  of  two  poems  based 
on  Psalm  137.  Byron  first  wrote :  "  We  sate  down 
and  wept  by  the  waters,"  and  later  on  another  ver- 
sion beginning:  "  In  the  valley  of  waters  we 
wept."  Byron  himself  observed  the  duplication, 
and  wished  to  suppress  the  former  copy.  It  is  well 
that  he  yielded  to  Nathan's  importunities,  for  the 
first  version  is  assuredly  the  finer.  But  the  incident 
shows  the  close  connection  between  the  verses  and 
the  music.  For  Byron  ended  the  discussion  with 
these  words :  "  I  must  confess  I  give  a  preference 
to  my  second  version  of  this  elegy;  and  since  your 
music  differs  so  widely  from  the  former,  I  see  no 
reason  why  it  should  not  also  make  its  public  ap- 
pearance." 

212 


BYRON'S  "  HEBREW  MELODIES  " 

Such  being  the  close  bond  between  poet  and 
musician,  it  is  all  the  more  regrettable  that  the  lat- 
ter did  not  make  a  more  competent  use  of  his 
opportunity.  A  better  fate  befell  the  earlier  col- 
laboration which  (in  1807)  resulted  in  Thomas 
Moore's  "  Irish  Melodies  " — a  title  which  sug- 
gested that  given  to  Byron's  series.  Stevenson 
served  Moore  better  than  Nathan  was  able  to  serve 
Byron.  Yet  it  seems  a  pity  to  leave  things  in  this 
condition.  Such  poems  as  those  already  alluded 
to — and  such  others  as  "  Saul,"  the  "  Vision  of 
Belshazzar,"  and  the  "  Destruction  of  Sennach- 
erib " — all  bear  the  clearest  marks  of  their  design; 
they  were  written  to  be  sung,  not  merely  to  be  read 
or  recited.  Jeffrey  spoke  of  their  sweetness;  Lyt- 
ton  of  their  depth  of  feeling;  Nathan  himself 
realized  that  "  Oh!  weep  for  those  "  reaches  the 
acme  of  emotional  sympathy  for  persecuted  Israel. 
Here,  then,  there  is  a  chance  for  a  modern  Jewish 
musician.  S.  Mandelkern,  in  1890,  gave  us  a 
spirited  translation  of  the  verses  into  the  Hebrew 
language.  Let  a  better  artist  than  Nathan  now 
translate  them  musically  into  the  Hebrew  spirit. 


213 


COLERIDGE'S  "  TABLE  TALK  " 

Coleridge  was  not  master  of  his  genius;  his 
genius  was  master  of  him.  In  one  place  he  speaks 
of  the  midrashic  fancies  about  the  state  of  our  first 
parents  as  "  Rabbinic  dotages  " ;  in  another  he 
laments,  with  Schelling,  that  these  same  rabbinic 
stories  are  neglected,  and  proceeds  in  his  periodical, 
The  Friend,  to  quote  several  with  obvious  ap- 
proval. Again,  he  writes  in  one  passage  of  the 
"  proverbial  misanthropy  and  bigotry  "  of  Phari- 
saism ;  then,  in  another,  he  asserts,  on  the  authority 
of  Grotius,  that  the  "  Lord's  Prayer  "  was  a  selec- 
tion from  the  liturgy  of  the  Synagogue. 

The  truth  is  that  a  large  part  of  Coleridge's  work 
is  of  the  nature  of  table  talk.  His  relative  indeed 
published  the  poet's  "  Table  Talk,"  but  a  good 
deal  else  in  Coleridge  belongs  to  the  same  category. 
His  thoughts  are,  for  the  most  part,  obiter  dicta, 
stray  jottings,  often  stating  profound  truths,  often 
expressing  sheer  nonsense.  On  the  whole,  he  was 
not  unkind  to  the  Jews.  He  delivered  many  lec- 
tures on  Shakespeare,  but  he  never  spoke  on  the 
Merchant  of  Venice.  He  alludes  with  contempt  to 

214 


COLERIDGE'S  "  TABLE  TALK  " 

the  incident  of  the  pound  of  flesh.  Jacob,  it,  is 
true,  he  regards  as  "  a  regular  Jew  "  because  of  his 
trickiness;  but  he  hastens  to  take  the  sting  out  of 
the  remark  by  adding:  "  No  man  could  be  a  bad 
man  who  loved  as  he  loved  Rachel." 

Throughout  we  find,  in  Coleridge's  remarks  on 
the  Jews  and  Judaism,  the  same  mixture  of  con- 
ventional views  and  original  judgments.  He  notes 
the  theory  that  the  Jews  were  destined  to  "  remain 
a  quiet  light  among  the  nations  for  the  purpose  of 
pointing  out  the  doctrine  of  the  unity  of  God," 
but  spoils  the  compliment  by  the  comment:  "  The 
religion  of  the  Jew  is,  indeed,  a  light;  but  it  is  the 
light  of  the  glow-worm,  which  gives  no  heat,  and 
illumines  nothing  but  itself."  He  can  see  in  the 
Jew  only  love  of  money,  yet  he  always  found  Jews 
"  possessed  of  a  strong  national  capacity  for  meta- 
physical discussions." 

The  last  remark  points  to  his  personal  familiarity 
with  Jews.  This  was  actually  the  case.  "  I  have 
had,"  he  says,  "  a  good  deal  to  do  with  Jews  in  the 
course  of  my  life,  although  I  never  borrowed  any 
money  from  them."  He  records  several  conversa- 
tions with  Jews,  and  does  not  hesitate  to  admit  that 
he  mostly  got  the  worst  of  the  argument.  He 
argued  with  one  Jew  about  conversion,  and  he  cites 

215 


BY-PATHS  IN  HEBRAIC  BOOKLAND 

the  Jew's  answer:  "  Let  us  convert  Jews  to  Juda- 
ism first  " — an  epigram  which  has  been  a  good 
deal  repeated  in  other  forms  since  1830,  when 
Coleridge  first  recorded  it.  On  one  occasion  he  ac- 
costed an  "  Old  Clothes  "  man,  and  in  a  hectoring 
tone  exclaimed:  "  Why  can't  you  pronounce  your 
trade  cry  clearly,  why  must  you  utter  such  a 
grunt?"  The  Jew  answered:  "Sir,  I  can  say 
1  Old  Clothes  '  as  well  as  you  can,  but  if  you  had 
to  say  it  ten  times  a  minute,  for  an  hour,  you  would 
say,  '  Ogh  clo'  '  as  I  do  now,"  and  so  he  marched 
off.  Coleridge  confesses  that  he  "  felt  floored." 
He  was  so  much  confounded  by  the  justice  of  his 
retort,  that,  to  cite  his  own  words  again:  "  I  fol- 
lowed, and  gave  him  a  shilling,  the  only  one  I  had." 
Of  one  particular  Jewish  friend  we  know.  Cole- 
ridge had  a  deep  affection  for  Hyman  Hurwitz, 
whom  he  terms  "  pious,  learned,  strong-minded, 
single-hearted."  Afterwards  Professor  of  Hebrew 
at  University  College,  London,  Hurwitz  was,  at  the 
beginning  of  the  nineteenth  century,  the  head  of  the 
"  Highgate  Academy."  He  died  in  1844,  sur- 
viving Coleridge  by  ten  years;  the  latter  died  at 
Highgate  in  1834.  Thus  the  poet  and  the  Hebraist 
were  neighbors  as  well  as  friends.  Coleridge  trans- 
lated into  poor  English  verse  Hurwitz's  feeble  He- 

216 


COLERIDGE'S  "  TABLE  TALK  " 

brew  elegy  on  the  death  of  Princess  Charlotte.  He 
also  contracted  to  prepare  for  the  publisher,  Mur- 
ray, a  volume  of  "  Rabbinical  Tales  " ;  in  this  work 
Hurwitz  was  to  collaborate  with  him.  The  fee  was 
settled;  it  was  to  be  two  hundred  guineas;  but  the 
arrangement  came  to  nothing.  Coleridge  was  rich 
in  plans  which  he  failed  to  accomplish.  As  an 
instance,  let  me  cite  what  he  says  about  an  epic  on 
the  "  Destruction  of  Jerusalem."  "  That,"  he 
declares,  "  is  the  only  subject  now  remaining  for 
an  epic  poem."  Mark  what  follows :  "  I  schemed 
it  at  twenty-five,  but,  alas !  venturum  expectat." 
Perhaps  another  remark  of  his  explains  why  he 
never  attempted  the  task.  The  subject  of  the 
destruction  of  Jerusalem,  with  great  capabilities, 
has  one  great  defect.  "  No  genius  or  skill  could 
possibly  preserve  the  interest  for  the  hero  being 
merged  in  the  interest  for  the  event  " — a  profound 
sentiment. 

Perhaps  in  no  direction  was  Coleridge  more  in 
advance  of  his  age  than  in  his  treatment  of  the 
ethics  of  the  Pharisees.  The  Pharisees  were,  he 
contends  truly,  not  a  sect;  they  were,  he  puts  it  less 
aptly,  the  Evangelicals  of  their  day.  By  that  he 
means  those  who  made  religion  the  main  concern 
of  life;  therein  he  is  right,  but  the  term  is  some- 

217 


BY-PATHS  IN  HEBRAIC  BOOKLAND 

what  unhappily  chosen.  Yet  not  from  one  point  of 
view.  I  have  already  cited  Coleridge's  opinion  as 
to  the  Jewish  sources  of  the  "  Lord's  Prayer." 
He  takes  up  a  similar  position  with  regard  to 
the  ethics  of  the  Gospels  in  general.  Here  is  a  very 
remarkable  concession:  "The  Being  and  Provi- 
dence of  the  Living  God,  holy,  gracious,  merci- 
ful, the  creator  and  preserver  of  all  things,  and  a 
father  of  the  righteous;  the  Moral  Law  in  its  ut- 
most height,  breadth,  and  purity;  a  state  of  retri- 
bution after  death,  the  Resurrection  of  the  Dead, 
and  a  Day  of  Judgment — all  these  were  known 
and  received  by  the  Jewish  people,  as  established 
articles  of  national  faith,  at  or  before  the  proclaim- 
ing of  Christ  by  the  Baptist."  This  is  taken,  not 
from  the  collection  of  "  Table  Talk  "  so  named, 
but  from  the  "  Aids  to  Reflection  "  (Aphorism 
vii).  Coleridge  justifies  his  claim  in  behalf  of  the 
Jews  by  citing  Leviticus  19.  2  and  Micah  6.  8,  find- 
ing the  acme  of  morality  in  the  command  to  be 
holy  and  in  the  prophet's  answer  to  the  question, 
'  What  doth  the  Lord  require  of  thee?  "  Just  so 
did  Huxley  choose  Micah's  saying:  "  To  do  justly, 
to  love  mercy,  and  walk  humbly  with  thy  God,"  as 
the  last  word  of  religion.  To  give  the  words  of 
Huxley  which  cannot  be  repeated  too  often:  "  If 

218 


COLERIDGE'S  "  TABLE  TALK  " 

any  so-called  religion  takes  away  from  this  great 
saying  of  Micah,  I  think  it  wantonly  mutilates, 
while  if  it  adds  thereto,  I  think  it  obscures,  the  per- 
fect idea  of  religion."  No  two  minds  were  more 
unlike  than  Huxley's  and  Coleridge's — the  one  the 
scientist,  the  other  the  metaphysician;  the  one  the 
agnostic,  the  other  the  mystic.  Yet  they  agreed  in 
perceiving  in  the  prophetic  teaching  a  unique  ex- 
pression of  basic  moral  truth. 


219 


BLANCO  WHITE'S  SONNET 

Fear  is  natural  by  night.  Man  in  the  day-time  is 
beset  by  foes;  but  while  he  can  use  his  eyes,  he  has 
a  sense  of  security.  Something  he  can  effect  to- 
wards self-protection.  But  in  the  dark  he  feels 
helpless. 

Hence  it  is  natural  that  the  Hebrew  poets  of  the 
Midrash  (on  Psalm  92)  have  used  as  a  theme 
Adam's  first  experience  of  the  dark.  There  was 
no  darkness  on  the  first  Friday  after  Creation.  The 
primeval  light,  which  illumined  the  world  from 
end  to  end,  was  not  quenched,  though  Adam  had 
already  sinned  before  night-fall  of  the  day  on 
which  he  was  born.  But  the  Sabbath  came  with 
the  Friday's  close,  and  the  celestial  rays  shone  on 
through  the  hours  that  should  have  been  obscure. 
When,  however,  the  Sabbath  had  passed,  the 
heavenly  light  passed  with  it,  and  Adam,  to  his 
consternation,  was  unable  to  see.  Would  not  the 
wily  serpent  choose  this  as  a  favorable  moment  for 
insidious  onslaught?  Then  the  light  that  failed 
in  nature  was  kindled  in  man's  intellect.  Adam, 

220 


BLANCO  WHITE'S  SONNET 

by  the  friction  of  two  stones,  cleverly  made  arti- 
ficial light,  and  so  could  see  again. 

So  runs  one  form  of  the  Jewish  legend.  Another 
(I  am  summarizing  both  from  Prof.  Louis  Ginz- 
berg's  Legends  of  the  Jews,  vol.  i,  pp.  86-89)  ex- 
presses the  thought  differently.  The  primeval  light 
does  not  figure  in  this  version,  but  it  is  the  normal 
sun  that  sinks  before  Adam's  gaze  on  the  Saturday 
night.  Adam  was  filled  with  compunction.  "  Woe 
is  me !  ",  he  exclaimed,  "  I  have  sinned,  and  be- 
cause of  me  is  the  world  darkened;  because  of  me 
it  will  again  return  to  a  condition  of  chaos."  So 
he  passed  the  long  vigil  of  the  dark  in  tears,  and 
Eve  wept  with  him.  But  with  the  day  he  dried 
his  eyes.  For  he  saw  the  sun  rise  once  more,  and 
realized  that  the  alternations  of  day  and  night 
were  part  of  the  divine  order  of  nature. 

In  both  these  fancies  Adam  is  much  disturbed  by 
his  first  experience  of  the  dark,  a  guilty  conscience 
made  a  coward  of  him.  But  not  all  Hebrew  homil- 
ists  rested  in  this  attitude  of  fear.  The  author  of 
the  eighth  Psalm  is  above  all  the  poet  of  the  night 
in  its  more  uplifting  aspects.  He  sees  not  the 
terror,  but  the  illumination  of  the  dark.  The  poet 
contemplates  the  heavens  at  night;  he  does  not 
mention  the  sun,  but  "  the  moon  and  the  stars  " 

221 


BY-PATHS  IN  HEBRAIC  BOOKLAND 

which  God  has  ordained.  "  Unquestionably,  the 
star-lit  sky,  especially  in  the  transparent  clearness 
of  an  Eastern  atmosphere,  is  more  suggestive  of 
the  vastness  and  variety  and  mystery  of  the  uni- 
verse." So  writes  Dr.  Kirkpatrick  on  Psalm  8.  3, 
and  he  refers  to  an  eloquent  passage  in  Whewell's 
Astronomy,  Book  III,  Chapter  3.  Certainly  those 
who  have  beheld  the  heavens  on  an  Oriental  night 
can  conceive  nothing  more  glorious  than  the  spec- 
tacle, nor  recall  aught  more  wonderful  than  the 
Psalmist's  description  of  it. 

It  was  left  to  the  theologian  Blanco  White  to 
combine  the  two  thoughts  of  fear  and  illumination, 
expressed  in  the  Midrash  quoted  above  and  in 
Psalm  8,  into  an  exquisite  Sonnet.  The  author's 
name  is  queer  enough.  But  though  Joseph  Blanco 
White  (1775-1841)  was  born  in  Seville,  he  was 
an  Irishman  by  descent.  When  the  family  settled 
in  Spain,  they  translated  the  patronymic  White  into 
Blanco.  On  his  coming  to  England,  the  theologian 
simply  retained  both  forms  of  the  name.  As  the 
writer  in  the  Dictionary  of  National  Biography 
recalls,  Blanco  White  applied  to  himself  the  lines 
which  occur  in  Richard  II,  Act  i,  scene  3.  Nor- 

222 


BLANCO  WHITE'S  SONNET 

folk,  doomed  to  exile  in  a  foreign  land,  thus 
laments  his  fate : 

The  language  I  have  learn'd  these  forty  years, 
My  native  English,  now  I  must  forgo; 
And  now  my  tongue's  use  is  to  me  no  more 
Than  an  unstringed  viol  or  a  harp. 

Strange  that  this  passage,  of  which  only  a  small 
part  has  been  here  quoted,  has  never  been  turned 
into  Hebrew,  with  a  change  in  one  single  word  of 
the  second  line,  by  a  Zionist.  Yet  more  strange 
that  Blanco  White,  who  thus  deplored  the  fact  that 
his  paternal  English  was  not  his  native  speech,  has 
given  us  one  of  the  greatest  poems  in  the  English 
language ! 

Mysterious  Night!  when  our  first  parent  knew 
Thee,  from  report  divine,  and  heard  thy  name, 
Did  he  not  tremble  for  this  lovely  Frame, 

This  glorious  canopy  of  Light  and  Blue? 

Yet  'neath  a  curtain  of  translucent  dew, 

Bathed  in  the  rays  of  the  great  setting  Flame, 
Hesperus  with  the  Host  of  Heaven  came, 

And  lo!     Creation  widened  in  Man's  view. 

Who  could  have  thought  such  darkness  lay  concealed 
Within  thy  beams,  O  sun !  or  who  could  find, 

Whilst  fly,  and  leaf,  and  insect  stood  revealed, 
That  to  such  countless  Orbs  thou  mad'st  us  blind? 

Why  do  we  then  shun  Death  with  anxious  strife? 

If  Light  can  thus  deceive,  wherefore  not  Life? 
223 


BY-PATHS  IN  HEBRAIC  BOOKLAND 

It  is  indeed  an  exquisite  thought.  First  we  have 
Adam's  fears  as  night  falls.  Then  we  have  the 
reply,  the  antidote.  The  sun  really  conceals.  Day 
shows  us  indeed  insect  and  plant,  but  not  the  vast 
system  of  worlds  which  fill  the  heavens.  It  is  night 
that  brings  to  view  the  amazing  extent  of  the  stars, 
and  unfolds  the  universe  which  the  day  had  hidden. 
So  death  may  reveal  much  that  life  conceals. 

Coleridge  pronounced  this  "  the  finest  and  most 
grandly  conceived  Sonnet  in  our  language."  The 
praise  is  not  exaggerated.  Yet  it  was  written  by 
one  whose  native  tongue  was  Spanish,  and  who, 
though  his  career  was  extraordinary  enough,  never 
wrote  another  line  in  prose  or  verse  that  has  lived. 
Single-speech  Hamilton  is  joined  in  the  realm  of 
immortality  by  Single-Sonnet  White.  Written 
about  a  century  ago,  it  lives  and  will  go  on  living. 
As  the  writer  from  whom  I  drew  the  allusion  to 
Shakespeare  remarks:  "  Probably  Blanco  White 
will  continue  to  be  known  by  this  Sonnet,  when  his 
other  works,  in  spite  of  the  real  interest  of  his 
views,  have  been  forgotten." 

Great  as  the  Sonnet  is,  it  fails,  however,  to  ex- 
press the  full  significance  of  the  eighth  Psalm.  The 
mazes  and  the  wonders  of  the  starry  heaven  above, 
unfolded  as  the  sun  sets  by  night,  raise  the  question 

224 


BLANCO  WHITE'S  SONNET 

"What  is  man?"  that  he  should  be  of  account 
when  compared  to  these  stupendous  forces  of 
nature.  Yet,  crowned  with  glory  and  honor,  man 
is  master  of  these  forces.  "  The  splendour  of  God 
set  above  the  heavens  is  reflected  in  His  image, 
man,  whom  He  has  crowned  as  His  representative 
to  rule  over  the  earth"  (Briggs).  Contrasted 
though  the  glories  be,  the  glory  of  man  as  creature 
is  related  to  the  glory  of  God  as  Creator. 


225 


DISRAELI'S  "ALROY' 

Benjamin  Disraeli  was  one  of  the  most  truthful 
authors  of  the  nineteenth  century.  To  confuse  his 
bombast  with  pose  is  to  misunderstand  him.  When, 
therefore,  he  said  of  Alroy  that  it  expressed  his 
"  ideal  ambition,"  there  is  no  reason  to  doubt  his 
sincerity.  Mr.  Monypenny,  whose  judgment  can- 
not be  trusted  in  general,  was  right  when  he  fully 
accepted  Disraeli's  statement  on  this  point.  Mr. 
Lucien  Wolf  had  previously  shown  (in  the  splendid 
preface  to  his  centenary  edition  of  Vivian  Grey) 
that  "  from  start  to  finish,  Lord  Beaconsfield's 
novels  are  so  many  echoes  and  glimpses  of  the 
Greater  Romance  of  his  own  life."  Would  that 
Mr.  Wolf  would  give  us  an  equally  fine  edition  of 
Alroy. 

For  Alroy  is  a  novel  that  deserves  to  live,  and 
probably  will  live.  From  the  first  it  has  been 
better  liked  by  the  public  than  by  the  professional 
critics.  Soon  after  the  book  first  appeared  in  1833, 
Disraeli  wrote  to  his  sister  that  he  heard  good  re- 
ports as  to  the  popularity  of  Alroy,  and  with  char- 
acteristic "  conceit,"  some  may  term  it,  though  to 

226 


DISRAELI'S  "ALROY" 

others  it  appears  more  like  "  insight,"  he  added: 
"  I  hear  no  complaints  of  its  style,  except  from  the 
critics."  Mr.  Monypenny  has  repeated  the  same 
critical  objections  to  the  style.  But  such  objections 
have  no  real  basis.  Alroy  often  falls  into  rhythms 
and  even  into  rhymes.  Why  is  this  a  defect  in  a 
prose  work?  Dickens  frequently  followed  the  same 
method,  and  in  sundry  impressive  passages  his  sen- 
tences scan  faultlessly.  Are  prose  and  verse  so 
absolutely  divided  from  one  another?  If  Moliere's 
bourgeois  gentleman  found  that  he  had  been  speak- 
ing prose  all  his  life  without  knowing  it,  so  do  we 
sometimes  speak  verse  without  being  conscious  of 
the  fact.  Do  we  not  all  "  drop  into  poetry  "  on 
occasion,  in  our  ordinary  speech  in  moments  of 
elevation?  Moreover,  the  Oriental  writers  had 
created  a  form  in  which  prose  and  verse  merge; 
and  Disraeli,  treating  an  Eastern  theme,  might 
easily  have  justified  his  choice  of  this  very  form, 
beloved  first  of  the  medieval  Arabs,  and  then 
adopted  by  Hebrew  contemporaries. 

Then,  as  to  the  character  of  Alroy  himself, 
Disraeli's  latest  biographer  says :  "  The  real  David 
Alroy  appears  to  have  been  little  better  than  a 
vulgar  impostor,  but  Disraeli  has  idealised  him 
into  a  figure  worthy  to  be  compared  with  Judas 

227 


BY-PATHS  IN  HEBRAIC  BOOKLAND 

Maccabaeus."  Mr.  Monypenny  borrowed  this 
judgment  (without  acknowledgment)  from  the 
Rev.  Michael  Adler's  able  article  in  the  Jewish 
Encyclopedia.  I  cannot  myself  assent  to  this  ver- 
dict, though  I  appreciate  the  grounds  on  which  it 
was  reached.  The  whole  thing  turns  on  the  appli- 
cation of  the  term  "  Pseudo-Messiah  "  to  such 
characters.  Why  call  them  false  ?  There  would 
be  sufficient  reason  for  applying  the  epithet  if  we 
had  the  clearest  evidence  that  they  were  conscious 
rogues,  exploiting  their  people's  faith,  and  using 
their  hope  as  a  ladder  towards  personal  ambition. 
We  do  not  know  enough  of  Alroy  to  assert  this  of 
him.  Was  Disraeli  himself  an  impostor  because 
he  thought  of  himself  as  another  redeemer  of 
Israel?  There  is  little  doubt  that  Alroy  is  drawn 
from  Disraeli  himself,  just  as  the  Miriam  of  the 
story  is  modelled  on  the  author's  own  sister.  It  is 
bad  psychology  to  dub  men  of  the  Alroy  type  as 
impostors.  Mr.  Zangwill,  in  his  Dreamers  of  the 
Ghetto — to  my  mind  his  most  wonderful  book — 
refuses  to  explain  Sabbatai  Zevi  in  this  easy  fash- 
ion. Graetz  naturally  so  explained  him,  but  it  was 
precisely  in  such  matters  that  Graetz  was  an  unsafe 
guide.  Are  we  to  judge  Messianic  claims  on  the 
same  principles  as  men  judge  political  upheavals? 

228 


DISRAELI'S  "ALROY" 

Treason  never  prospers,  and  for  this  reason: 
That  when  it  prospers  no  one  calls  it  treason. 

Is  an  enthusiastic  believer  in  himself,  as  the  in- 
strument of  a  great  emancipation,  "  pseudo  "  be- 
cause he  fails  ?  Such  explanations  explain  nothing. 

Whatever  be  the  truth  as  to  the  original  Alroy — 
and  I  repeat  that  the  historical  sources  give  us  in- 
adequate information  as  to  his  inner  personality — 
there  is  no  room  for  doubting  the  character  of 
Disraeli's  fictitious  hero.  Alroy  is  a  thoroughly 
sincere  portraiture.  Mr.  Monypenny  thought  that 
the  story  "  never  really  grips  us."  It  depends  on 
who  the  "  us  "  are.  A  good  many  readers  find 
George  Eliot's  Daniel  Deronda  uninteresting.  Yet 
Daniel  Deronda  in  Hebrew  had  a  considerable  suc- 
cess. Despite  its  queer  mixture  of  ill-digested  lore 
and  of  genuine  material  derived  from  what  Disraeli 
termed  the  "  erratic  "  Talmud,  Alroy  has  a  good 
deal  of  Jewish  spirit  in  it.  In  the  many  references 
to  the  poetical  elements  of  Jewish  life,  the  senti- 
ment rings  true.  This  fact  works  backward. 
Whence  did  the  novelist  derive  this  feeling  for  the 
beautiful  in  Judaism  except  from  his  father? 
Isaac  Disraeli  presents  himself  to  us  as  a  rather  un- 
sympathetic student  of  Judaism.  In  his  books  he 

229 


BY-PATHS  IN  HEBRAIC  BOOKLAND 

shows  knowledge,  but  no  feeling  for  the  syna- 
gogue. It  almost  seems  as  though  we  do  not  see 
the  real  man  in  his  books,  and  yet,  after  all,  it  may 
be  doubted  whether  Benjamin  inherited  his  Jewish 
idealism  from  his  father.  The  latter  did  not  at  all 
approve  of  his  son's  Eastern  journey.  But  Ben- 
jamin was  consumed  with  the  desire  to  visit  Jeru- 
salem, and  he  realized  this  passionate  longing  in 
1830-1.  In  later  life  he  said  that  he  had  begun 
Alroy  before  he  left  England.  In  the  preface  to 
Alroy  he  writes :  "  Being  at  Jerusalem  in  the  year 
1831,  and  visiting  the  traditionary  tombs  of  the 
Kings  of  Israel,  my  thoughts  recurred  to  a  person- 
age whose  marvellous  career  had,  even  in  boyhood, 
attracted  my  attention,  as  one  fraught  with  the 
richest  materials  of  poetic  fiction.  And  I  then 
commenced  these  pages  that  should  commemorate 
the  name  of  *  Alroy.'  "  I  do  not  think  that  this 
statement  contradicts  his  later  assertion.  When  he 
says:  "  I  then  commenced,"  he  may  well  be  refer- 
ring to  his  "  boyhood." 

Disraeli  thoroughly  enjoyed  his  stay  in  the  Holy 
Land.  He  refused  to  admit  that  Athens  was  more 
impressive  than  Jerusalem.  "  I  will  not  place  this 
spectacle,"  he  exclaims  of  the  site  of  the  ancient 
temple,  "  below  the  city  of  Minerva."  Perhaps 

230 


DISRAELI'S  "ALROY" 

the  most  arresting  detail  in  Alroy  is  the  thirty-fifth 
note — the  notes  to  the  book,  after  the  manner  of 
Sir  Walter  Scott,  are  full  of  curious  learning.    He 
discusses  the   origin  of  coffee,   the   habits  of  the 
marten-cat,  the  art  and  furniture  of  the  Orient,  the 
sunset  songs  of  Eastern  maidens,  the  "  Daughter 
of  the  Voice,"  the  Persian  hurling  of  the  jerreeds 
(javelins)   into  the  air,  the  practice  of  the  basti- 
nado, the  "  golden  wine  "  of  Mount  Lebanon,  the 
alleged  playing  of  chess  before  the  date  of  the 
Trojan  War,  screens  and  fans  made  of  the  feath- 
ers of  the  roc,  and  the  "  tremulous  aigrettes  of 
brilliants  "  worn  by  persons  of  the  highest  rank.  In 
all  these  directions  Disraeli's  learning  and  fancy 
run  riot,  and  the  result,  sometimes  as  grotesque  as 
a  nightmare,  is  often  successful  in  producing  the 
required  effect.     But  this  thirty-fifth  entry  strikes 
a  more  personal  note.     Let  us  read  it  in  his  own 
words,  remembering,  however,  that  the  Mosque  of 
Omar  was  certainly  in  existence  in  Alroy's  day: 
"  The  finest  view  of  Jerusalem  is  from  the  Mount 
of  Olives.,     It   is  little   altered  since  the  period 
when    David   Alroy   is   supposed   to   have   gazed 
upon    it;    but    it    is    enriched    by    the    splendid 
Mosque  of  Omar,  built  by  the  Moslem  conquerors 
on  the  supposed  site  of  the  Temple,  and  which, 

231 


BY-PATHS  IN  HEBRAIC  BOOKLAND 

with  its  gardens,  and  arcades,  and  courts,  and  foun- 
tains, may  fairly  be  described  as  the  most  imposing 
of  Moslem  fanes.  I  endeavored  to  enter  it  at  the 
hazard  of  my  life.  I  was  detected  and  surrounded 
by  a  crowd  of  turbaned  fanatics,  and  escaped  with 
difficulty;  but  I  saw  enough  to  feel  that  minute 
inspection  would  not  belie  the  general  character  I 
formed  from  it  from  the  Mount  of  Olives.  I 
caught  a  glorious  glimpse  of  splendid  courts,  and 
light  airy  gates  of  Saracenic  triumph,  flights  of 
noble  steps,  long  arcades,  and  interior  gardens, 
where  silver  fountains  spouted  their  tall  streams 
amid  the  taller  cypresses." 

Here  we,  too,  have  a  "  glorious  glimpse  "  into 
one-half  of  the  real  Disraeli — here  and  in  Tancred; 
for  the  other  half  we  must  study  his  political  novels. 
Fivian  Grey,  so  Disraeli  himself  said,  expressed  his 
"  practical,"  as  Alroy  expressed  his  "  ideal,"  am- 
bition. And  one  final  word.  I  have  said  nothing 
of  the  plot  of  Alroy.  I  assume  it  to  be  familiar  to 
my  readers.  If  it  be  not,  they  can  easily  make  good 
the  omission.  I  have  no  fear  that  this  story  of  a 
twelfth  century — shall  I  call  him  "  hero  "  or  "  im- 
postor "  ? — will  fail  to  grip.  For  it  is  more  than 
a  story,  it  is — to  use  that  over-worked  phrase — 
also  a  "  human  document." 

232 


ROBERT  GRANT'S  "  SACRED  POEMS  " 

When  Gibbon  wrote  the  famous  fiftieth  chapter 
of  the  Decline  and  Fall,  he  was  suspected  of  being 
a  Mohammedan,  because  he  dealt  leniently  with 
the  Arab  religion.  Edwin  Arnold  was  half  be- 
lieved to  be  a  Buddhist,  because  his  Light  of  Asia 
idealized  the  saint  of  India.  But  Robert  Grant 
was  never  called  a  Jew,  despite  the  fact  that  he 
was  the  champion  of  Jewish  rights  in  Parliament. 
Grant  was  too  genuine  a  Christian  for  anyone  to 
doubt  his  orthodoxy.  The  same  man  who  brought 
in  the  1830  Bill  to  remove  Jewish  political  dis- 
abilities was  the  author  of  some  of  the  most  popu- 
lar hymns  of  the  Church. 

Yet,  as  though  to  show  the  Hebrew  spirit  of  this 
non-Hebraic  friend  of  the  Hebrews,  the  best  of  his 
poems  were  written  on  Hebrew  themes.  Sir  Robert 
Grant  died  in  India  in  1838;  he  had  gone  out  as 
governor  of  Bombay.  In  the  following  year,  his 
brother,  Lord  Glenelg,  published  Grant's  Sacred 
Poems.  It  was  a  small  book,  containing  in  all  only 
a  dozen  items.  But  it  had  a  great  vogue,  and 

233 


'BY-PATHS  IN  HEBRAIC  BOOKLAND 

some  of  the  poems  found  a  place  "  in  almost  every 
collection  of  devotional  verse,"  as  the  children  of 
the  author  proudly  claim  in  the  preface  to  the  1868 
edition.  Grant  would  have  been  especially  grati- 
fied, one  may  feel  certain,  had  he  been  able  to  an- 
ticipate that  his  translation  of  parts  of  Psalm  104 
would  be  adopted  in  such  Jewish  compilations  as 
the  Services  for  Children  drawn  up  for  use  in  the 
New  West  End  Synagogue,  London. 

A  charming  poem  did  Grant  write  on  the  text: 
"  Whom  have  I  in  heaven  but  Thee?  And  there 
is  none  upon  earth  that  I  desire  in  comparison  of 
Thee  "  (Psalm  73.  25).  Earth  is  beautiful  with 
its  "  woods  that  wave,"  its  "  hills  that  tower,"  and 
"  Ocean  rolling  in  his  power  " ;  human  friendship 
is  a  "  gem  transcending  price,"  while  love  is  a 
"  flower  from  Paradise," 

Yet,  amidst  this  scene  so  fair, 
Should  I  cease  Thy  smile  to  share, 
What  were  all  its  joys  to  me? 
Whom  have  I  on  earth  but  Thee? 

And  so  with  heaven,  where  "  beyond  our  sight," 
there  "  rolls  a  world  of  purer  light,"  with  its  un- 
clouded bliss,  its  union  of  severed  hearts,  where 
"  immortal  music  rings "  from  "  unnumbered 
seraph  strings." 

234 


ROBERT  GRANT'S  "  SACRED  POEMS  " 

O!  that  world  is  passing  fair; 
Yet  if  Thou  wert  absent  there, 
What  were  all  its  joys  to  me? 
Whom  have  I  in  heaven  but  Thee? 

The  poem  might  have  closed  there,  perhaps 
a  stronger  writer  would  have  suppressed  the  thin 
stanza.  But  while  it  detracts  from  the  virility  of 
the  verses,  it  adds  measurably  to  their  tenderness. 

Lord  of  earth  and  heaven!  my  breast 
Seeks  in  Thee  its  only  rest; 
I  was  lost,  Thy  accents  mild 
Homeward  lur'd  Thy  wandering  child; 
I  was  blind;  Thy  healing  ray 
Charm'd  the  long  eclipse  away; 
Source  of  every  joy  I  know, 
Solace  of  my  every  woe, 
O  if  once  Thy  smile  divine 
Ceas'd  upon  my  soul  to  shine, 
What  were  earth  or  heaven  to  me? 
What  have  I  in  each  but  Thee? 

Almost  as  good  in  idea,  though  not  so  perfect  in 
form,  is  Grant's  set  of  verses  on  Psalm  94.   12: 
Blessed  is  the  man  whom  thou  chastenest." 


u 


Enchanted  with  all  that  was  dazzling  and  fair, 
I  followed  the  rainbow — I  caught  at  the  toy; 

And  still  in  displeasure  Thy  goodness  was  there, 
Disappointing  the  hope,   and  defeating  the  joy. 

The  divine  goodness  is  seen  in  man's  disappoint- 
ments, when  the  fulfilment  of  hope  would  have  been 
loss,  not  gain. 

235 


BY-PATHS  IN  HEBRAIC  BOOKLAND 

On  the  whole,  however,  Grant  is  less  successful 
when  writing  to  a  text  than  when  paraphrasing  a 
context.  His  renderings  of  certain  Psalms  are 
among  the  best  attempts  of  the  kind.  This  praise 
applies  to  his  version  of  Psalm  49;  less  unreser- 
vedly to  his  adaptation  of  Psalm  2.  In  rendering 
Psalm  71,  Grant  gave  sentiment  too  loose  a  rein. 
Addison  had  translated  the  opening  verses  of  Psalm 
19,  beginning  "  The  spacious  firmament  on  high." 
Grant  composed  what  he  called  "  a  sequel  or  coun- 
terpart "  to  Addison's  hymn,  corresponding  to  the 
latter  portion  of  Psalm  19  as  Addison's  fragment 
corresponds  to  the  earlier  portion.  Grant's  sup- 
plement ends  thus : 

Almighty  Lord!   the  sun  shall  fail, 
The  moon  forget  her  nightly  tale, 
And  deepest   silence  hush  on  high 
The  radiant  chorus  of  the  sky; 
But,  fixed  for  everlasting  years, 
Unmoved  amid  the  wreck  of  spheres, 
Thy  word  shall  shine  in  cloudless  day, 
When  heaven  and  earth  have  passed  away. 

This  is  fine,  but  Grant  here  hardly  bears  com- 
parison  with  Addison:  it  is  the  fate  of  sequels  to 
prove  inferior  to  their  forerunners.  There  is  noth- 

236 


ROBERT  GRANT'S  "SACRED  POEMS" 

ing  in  Grant's  version  to  equal  Addison's  close, 
where  the  sun,  moon,  and  stars  are 

Forever  singing  as  they  shine, 

"  The  hand  that  made  us  is  divine." 

On  the  other  hand,  Grant  falls  very  little  below 
Milton  in  his  imitation  of  part  of  Psalm  84.  I 
must  find  room  to  quote  it  in  full. 

How  deep  the  joy,  Almighty  Lord, 
Thy  altars  to  the  heart  afford! 

With  envying  eyes  I  see 
The  swallow  fly  to  nestle  there, 
And  find  within  the  house  of  prayer 

A  bliss  denied  to  me ! 

Compelled  by  day  to  roam  for  food 
Where  scorching  suns  or  tempests  rude 

Their  angry  influence  fling, 
O,  gladly  in  that  sheltered  nest 
She  smooths,  at  eve,  her  ruffled  breast, 

And  folds  her  weary  wing. 
Thrice  happy  wand'rer!  fain  would  I, 
Like  thee,  from  ruder  climates  fly, 

That  seat  of  rest  to  share; 
Opprest  with  tumult,  sick  with  wrongs, 
How  oft  my  fainting  spirit  longs 

To  lay  its  sorrows  there! 

Oh!  ever  on  that  holy  ground 
The  cov'ring  cherub  Peace  is  found, 
With  brooding  wings  serene; 
237 


BY-PATHS  IN  HEBRAIC  BOOKLAND 

And  Charity's  seraphic  glow, 
And  gleams  of  glory  that  foreshow 
A  higher,  brighter  scene. 

For  even  that  refuge  but  bestows 
A  transient  tho'  a  sweet  repose, 

For  one  short  hour  allowed; — 
Then  upwards  we  shall  take  our  flight 
To  hail  a  spring  without  a  blight, 

A  heaven  without  a  cloud! 

Had  Grant  ever  studied  rabbinic  commentaries? 
For  this  is  the  very  use  made  of  the  eighty-fourth 
Psalm  in  the  Midrash.  The  earthly  pilgrimage 
leads  to  the  heavenly  Zion. 

I  have  used  for  this  poem  space  which  some 
readers  may  have  expected  me  to  reserve  for  the 
best  of  all  of  Grant's  renderings,  that  of  portions 
of  Psalm  104.  In  this  Grant  not  only  does  not  fall 
below  the  greatest  of  his  predecessors — Henry 
Vaughan — but  he  transcends  even  that  master's 
work.  It  is  true  that  Vaughan  renders  the  whole 
of  this  long  Psalm  literally,  whereas  Grant  merely 
paraphrases  a  few  verses.  But  none  the  less, 
Grant's  "  O  Worship  the  King  "  is  a  superb  repro- 
duction of  the  Psalmist's  spirit.  As  not  uncom- 
monly happens  with  Grant,  he  falls  off  towards  the 
end,  and  his  sixth  verse  is  nowadays  justly  deleted 

238 


ROBERT  GRANT'S  "  SACRED  POEMS  " 

when  the  rendering  is  used  liturgically.  Nothing, 
however,  could  be  more  exquisite  than  these 
stanzas: 

The  earth  with  its  store 

Of  wonders  untold, 
Almighty!     Thy  power 

Hath  founded  of  old: 
Hath  'stablished  it  fast 

By  a  changeless  decree, 
And  round  it  hath  cast, 

Like  a  mantle,  the  sea. 

Thy  bountiful  care 

What  tongue  can  recite? 
It  breathes  in  the  air, 

It  shines  in  the  light; 
It  streams  from  the  hills, 

It  descends  to  the  plains, 
And  sweetly  distils 

In  the  dew  and  the  rain. 

One  wonders  at  his  versatility.  He  could  draft 
a  bill  for  parliament  deftly,  and  then  indite  such 
verses  as  those  quoted.  There  is,  indeed,  some- 
thing akin  to  the  Hebrew  genius  in  the  English. 
For  David,  too,  could  govern,  and  in  the  intervals 
of  ruling  meditate  the  Psalms  which  make  so  eter- 
nal an  appeal.  On  Robert  Grant,  the  advocate  of 
Jewish  rights,  there  had,  indeed,  fallen  a  portion  of 

the  Davidic  spirit. 

239 


GUTZKOW'S  "  URIEL  ACOSTA  " 

Twice  within  my  recollection  there  were  hopes 
of  the  production  of  Uriel  Acosta  on  the  Eng- 
lish stage.  Soon  after  Sir  Hall  Caine  published 
the  Scapegoat — that  noblest  of  recent  tales  with 
a  "  Jewish  "  plot — Sir  Herbert  Tree  was  present 
with  the  novelist  at  a  Maccabean  banquet.  On  that 
occasion  Sir  Herbert,  adopting  a  suggestion  of  my 
own,  announced  that  he  had  proposed  to  Mr.  Zang- 
will  the  office  of  preparing  Uriel  Acosta  for  His 
Majesty's  Theatre.  Nothing  has  come  of  it. 
Some  years  before,  that  competent  actor,  Mr.  A. 
Bandmann,  was  lessee  of  the  Lyceum  for  a  time. 
He  had  often  played  the  part  of  Uriel  in  Germany 
with  success,  and  he  had  an  English  version  made. 
It  was  not  performed,  but  the  plan  was  so  far 
fruitful  that  Mr.  H.  Spicer's  adaptation  was  pub- 
lished. 

It  is  a  workmanlike  but  undistinguished  render- 
ing. It  introduces  mistakes  for  which  Gutzkow  is 
guiltless  (such  as  the  barbarism  Sanhedrim),  and 
it  omits  points  which  make  up  Gutzkow's  merit. 
Curious,  for  instance,  is  it  that  the  English  version 

240 


GUTZKOW'S  "  URIEL  ACOSTA  " 

should  obscure  the  line  which  so  lingers  in  the  mind 
of  the  reader  of  the  original,  the  line  in  fact  most 
often  quoted  of  everything  that  Gutzkow  wrote. 
I  refer,  of  course,  to  the  old  Rabbi's  constant  com- 
ment on  Uriel's  heresies.  These,  urged  the  Rabbi, 
are  as  old  as  old ;  it  has  all  happened  before  ( "  Alles 
ist  schon  einmal  dagewesen").  It  is  a  striking 
variant  on  Solomon's  epigram,  "  there  is  nothing 
new  under  the  sun"  (Ecclesiastes  I.  9),  and  it 
drones  through  the  recantation  scene  with  fine 
dramatic  effect.  Far  superior  to  this  English  ver- 
sion is  the  Hebrew  rendering  published  by  Salomo 
Rubin  in  1856. 

The  actual  facts  about  Uriel  Acosta  are  soon 
told.  His  was  an  arresting  personality,  but  his 
importance  has  been  much  overrated.  Acosta 
would  have  been  deservedly  forgotten  but  for  the 
similarity  between  his  career  and  that  of  another 
Amsterdam  Jew  of  the  same  period — Baruch 
Spinoza.  Both  came  into  conflict  with  the  syna- 
gogue, both  were  excommunicated.  But  there  the 
resemblance  ends.  In  Gutzkow's  play,  Uriel  pro- 
claims himself  sufficient  unto  himself  ("  Mir  selber 
bin  ich  cine  ganze  Welt").  This  is  just  what 
Spinoza  was,  just  what  Uriel  was  not.  Gutzkow 
represents  Uriel  as  a  youth  at  the  time  of  his  sui- 

16  241 


BY-PATHS  IN  HEBRAIC  BOOKLAND 

cide.  But  he  was  certainly  over  fifty,  and  more 
probably  was  nearer  sixty.  He  shot  himself  in 
1 647 ;  and  as  it  appears  that  he  was  born  in  Oporto 
in  1590,  he  must  have  been  fifty-seven  at  the 
moment  of  his  tragic  end.  Uriel  (or  Gabriel  as  he 
was  then  named)  was  the  scion  of  a  Marano  family, 
and  in  1617  contrived  to  escape  to  Holland,  where 
he  resumed  Judaism.  But  he  was  no  more  con- 
tented with  his  ancestral  religion  than  he  had  beeen 
with  the  creed  to  which  he  had  compulsorily  con- 
formed. He  advocated  a  purely  deistic  philos- 
ophy, was  excommunicated  by  the  synagogue, 
recanted,  again  defied  the  authorities,  was  again  ex- 
communicated, and  finally  underwent  the  degrada- 
tion of  a  public  penance,  after  which  he  put  an  end 
to  his  troubled  life.  Uriel's  misfortune  was  that, 
though,  like  Spinoza,  he  was  unable  to  go  with  the 
mass  in  its  beliefs,  yet  unlike  Spinoza,  he  was  unable 
to  stand  alone. 

Gutzkow  was  attracted  to  the  subject  by  his 
own  devotion  to  freedom.  In  the  stormy  move- 
ments which  culminated  in  the  outbreaks  of  1848, 
Gutzkow  was  directly  implicated.  He  was  born 
in  1 8 1 1 ,  and,  when  barely  twenty,  suffered  impris- 
onment as  a  leader  of  the  "  Young  Germany  " 
party.  Besides,  Gutzkow  had  many  close  Jewish 

242 


GUTZKOW'S  "  URIEL  ACOSTA  " 

friends,  among  them  Berthold  Auerbach,  who, 
perhaps,  introduced  Uriel  Acosta  to  his  notice. 
When  Gutzkow  wrote  his  play  on  the  subject, 
Europe  was  on  the  eve  of  revolution.  It  is  signifi- 
cant, in  face  of  the  anti-Semitism  which  really  orig- 
inated on  the  failure  of  the  Liberals,  that  Gutzkow 
selected,  in  1847,  a  Jewish  mis-en-scene,  in  order 
to  depict  the  struggle  between  the  old  order  and 
the  new.  And  it  is  impossible  to  refuse  admiration 
to  the  insight  and  skill  which  enable  the  author, 
while  obviously  sympathizing  with  the  new,  to  treat 
the  old  with  justice  and  even  with  tenderness.  The 
characters  are  all  types.  Menasseh,  father  of 
Judith,  is  the  fair-dealing  merchant,  accepting  the 
current  religion  of  his  people  without  enthusiasm 
for  or  against  its  demands.  Judith,  the  heroine, 
more  or  less  betrothed  to  Jochai,  the  villain  of  the 
piece,  is  vaguely  susceptible  to  the  newer  ideas  of 
her  tutor  and  lover  Uriel.  Jochai  is  a  rather  con- 
ventionally drawn  rascal.  But  the  strength  of  the 
play  is  the  contrast,  on  the  one  hand,  between 
Uriel  and  the  Rabbis,  and,  on  the  other,  between 
the  various  schools  of  Rabbis  among  themselves. 
Da  Silva  has  the  tolerance  of  uncertainty  as  to  his 
own  position,  Akiba  has  the  broad  generosity  which 
comes  from  confidence  in  his  old-world  loyalty. 

243 


BY-PATHS  IN  HEBRAIC  BOOKLAND 

The  scenes  between  Uriel  and  Silva,  and  between 
the  former  and  Akiba  would  make  a  success  on  any 
stage.  "  May  you  never  repent  of  this  repentance," 
cries  Da  Silva  to  Akiba  when  there  is  talk  of  Uriel's 
recantation.  There  is  strong  emotional  interest  in 
this  recantation.  Shall  Uriel  recant  for  Judith's 
sake?  Hardly.  But  he  cannot  resist  the  appeal 
of  his  blind  mother.  "  I  tremble  before  thy  sight- 
less eyes;  shut  thine  eyes,  mother!  Yea,  I  will 
do  it." 

The  close  is  tragic.  Both  Judith  and  Uriel  per- 
ish at  their  own  hands.  But  the  tragedy  did  not 
end  there.  Mention  has  been  made  of  Da  Silva. 
If  Uriel  is  the  counterpart  of  the  talmudic  arch- 
heretic,  Elisha  ben  Abuyah,  then  is  Da  Silva  the  re- 
incarnation of  Elisha's  contemporary  Meir.  Who 
has  not  wept  over  the  heart  friendship  but  mind 
estrangement  of  these  two  men  ?  Da  Silva  stands  in 
the  same  relation  to  Uriel.  He  hates  the  heresy, 
but  loves  the  heretic.  Uriel  himself  uses  words 
which  sum  up  the  situation.  "  Love  or  Truth? 
What  if  the  heart  be  wiser  than  the  mind?  " 
Spinoza  (who  was  really  fifteen  years  of  age  when 
Uriel  died)  flits  across  the  scene  as  a  little  boy, 
strewing  flowers  and  wondering  why  people  won- 
der at  his  childish  thoughts.  Uriel  bids  him  "  Keep 

244 


GUTZKOW'S  "  URIEL  ACOSTA  " 

thy  soul's  secret  and  so  find  peace."  This  is  per- 
haps the  most  tragic  incident  in  the  play,  though 
the  dramatist  contrives  to  relieve  the  tension  by  the 
simple  beauty  of  the  Spinoza  interlude. 

Still,  however,  the  whole  of  the  tragedy  has  not 
yet  been  told.  For  Hermann  Jellinek  has  not  yet 
been  named.  Indeed,  three  remarkable  Jellinek 
brothers  now  come  on  the  scene.  In  1847  two  lit- 
tle works  appeared  on  Gutzkow's  Uriel.  The  one 
(Elischa  ben  A  buy  a)  was  written  by  Adolf  Jelli- 
nek, then  the  youthful  preacher  of  Leipzig,  after- 
wards the  famous  pulpit  orator  of  Vienna.  The 
other  was  Uriel  Acosta's  Leben  und  Lehre,  and 
its  author  was  Hermann  Jellinek  (younger  than 
Adolf  by  a  couple  of  years).  The  booklet  was 
inscribed  to  a  third  brother,  Moritz.  Now  Her- 
mann Jellinek  was  roused  to  a  heated  indignation 
by  Gutzkow's  "  fictions  "  about  Uriel.  Uriel  was 
no  lovelorn  boy,  but  a  middle-aged  philosopher; 
he  died  not  for  loss  of  Judith,  but  as  a  martyr  to 
truth.  Hermann  Jellinek  in  so  many  words  sees 
his  own  prototype  in  Acosta ;  less  than  a  year  later 
he  at  all  events  shared  his  hero's  tragic  end;  but 
under  more  dignified  circumstances.  What  the  his- 
torical Uriel  Acosta  lacked,  Hermann  Jellinek 
possessed  in  over  measure — the  quality  of  determi- 

245 


BY-PATHS  IN  HEBRAIC  BOOKLAND 

nation.  Hermann  was  a  revolutionary,  and  took 
part  in  the  Viennese  rising  of  1848,  being  twenty- 
six  at  the  time.  He  does  not  seem  to  have  actually 
resisted  the  troops,  but  he  was  court-martialled, 
and  sentenced  to  death.  His  friends  made  every 
effort  to  save  him,  but  he  was  relentless.  Nothing 
could  move  him  to  present  a  conciliatory  front  to 
the  authorities.  In  this  at  least  he  could  be  no 
Uriel!  Recant?  No!  "Shoot  me,"  he  cried, 
"  but  ideas  cannot  be  shot."  They  shot  him,  and 
his  ideas  may  be  found  in  two  or  three  volumes,  of 
which  dusty  copies  occur  in  a  few  libraries.  I  have 
some  of  them  on  my  table  as  I  write.  It  is  not  easy 
to  say  which  is  the  greater  tragedy,  Acosta's  or 
Jellinek's ;  but  for  the  moment  at  least  let  Jellinek 
have  his  way.  For  an  hour  we  have  resurrected,  if 
not  his  ideas,  at  all  events  his  name. 


246 


GRACE  AGUILAR'S  "  SPIRIT  OF 
JUDAISM  " 

Known  to  the  many  for  her  novels,  Grace 
Aguilar  is  known  to  the  few  for  her  Spirit  of  Juda- 
ism. The  book  passed  through  a  real  adventure, 
quite  as  exciting  as  the  fictional  fortunes  of  any  of 
her  romantic  heroes.  Somewhat  before  1840, 
Miss  Aguilar  wrote  to  Isaac  Leeser,  of  Philadel- 
phia. She  had,  in  1839,  read  the  Rabbi's  first  pub- 
lished sermons — his  Bible  was  yet  to  come.  She 
asked  him  "  to  undertake  the  editorial  supervision 
of  her  manuscript  work  on  the  Spirit  of  our  re- 
ligion." Leeser  courteously  responded  to  the 
request.  "  I  shall  readily  be  believed,"  he  wrote 
in  1842,  "  that  I  felt  truly  happy  that  such  a  de- 
mand had  been  made  upon  me;  and  I  accordingly 
offered  my  services  to  do  as  I  was  desired."  Miss 
Aguilar  completed  the  book,  but  chance  decreed 
that  it  was  not  to  reach  its  goal.  She  sent  it  out  to 
America  "  through  a  private  channel,"  and  it  never 
came  to  Leeser's  hands.  Such  a  mishap  did  not 
thwart  so  ardent  and  industrious  a  girl — she  was 
not  much  over  twenty  at  the  time.  She  accordingly 

247 


BY-PATHS  IN  HEBRAIC  BOOKLAND 

proceeded  to  re-write  it  "  from  her  original 
sketches,"  made  in  1837.  On  the  second  occasion 
fortune  was  more  kind,  though  the  book  encoun- 
tered some  further  delays  before  it  appeared,  in 
1842,  in  America. 

A  second  edition — much  inferior  from  the  point 
of  view  of  "get-up" — was  published  in  1849, 
again  in  Philadelphia.  The  second  issue  was 
No.  xiii  of  the  Jewish  Miscellany  of  the  original 
Jewish  Publication  Society.  The  book  was  never 
printed  in  England.  My  own  introduction  to  it 
was  curiously  made.  Being  deeply  interested  in  the 
new  plans  for  teaching  Hebrew,  I  wrote  (in  1903) , 
a  preface  to  a  book  on  the  Yellin  method.  I  showed 
the  proof  of  my  essay  to  the  late  Rev.  S.  Singer, 
whereupon  he  remarked:  "Grace  Aguilar  said 
much  the  same  thing  more  than  half  a  century 
ago."  And  so,  indeed,  she  did.  She  saw  that 
Hebrew  must  be  taught  naturally,  that  the  lan- 
guage must  be  made  to  "  engage  a  child's  fancy," 
by  first  of  all  introducing  to  it  familiar  Hebrew 
words  from  the  child's  every-day  life.  Glad  was 
I  to  find  this  anticipation  of  modern  opinion,  and  I 
cited  it  fully. 

From  that  time  I  have,  for  other  reasons,  grown 
very  fond  of  the  book — of  which  I  possess  the  1 849 

248 


GRACE  AGUILAR 


GRACE  AGUILAR'S  "  SPIRIT  OF  JUDAISM  " 

reprint.  It  is  so  delightfully  fresh  and  young,  so 
confident  and  enthusiastic.  Moreover,  there  is 
something  entertaining  in  Leeser's  conception  of 
his  editorial  function.  Not  that  he  could  well  help 
himself.  He  was  almost  compelled  to  apply  a  wet 
blanket  to  her  fire.  She  had  expressly  invited  him 
to  confine  himself  to  removing  obscurities  and  ap- 
pending the  necessary  notes.  "  The  chief  point  of 
difference  between  Miss  Aguilar  and  myself,"  says 
Leeser,  "  are  her  seeming  aversion  to  the  tradition, 
and  her  idea  that  the  mere  teaching  of  formal  re- 
ligion opens  the  door  to  the  admission  of  Chris- 
tianity." On  the  second  point,  Leeser's  answer  is 
effective.  If,  through  unintelligent  teaching,  cere- 
monial religion  degenerates  into  a  burden,  then 
the  outcome  is  more  likely  to  be  disregard  for  the 
old  than  regard  for  a  new  faith.  "  Indifference  is 
a  far  greater  enemy  to  us  than  conversion,"  said 
Leeser  in  1842,  and  assuredly  we  can  use  identical 
words  now.  It  is  not  so  clear,  however,  that  Leeser 
was  equally  successful  in  meeting  Miss  Aguilar  on 
the  problem  of  tradition.  She  was  very  emphatic 
in  her  desire  to  base  Judaism  on  the  Bible,  but  she 
was  only  verbally,  not  spiritually,  a  Karaite.  She 
often  uses  the  very  language  of  tradition,  and  in 
one  place  says :  "  The  religion  of  no  Hebrew  is 

249 


BY-PATHS  IN  HEBRAIC  BOOKLAND 

perfect,  unless  the  form  be  hallowed  by  the  spirit, 
the  spirit  quickened  by  the  form.  The  heart  must 
be  wholly  given  to  the  Lord,  yet  still  the  instituted 
form  must  be  obeyed."  Miss  Aguilar  probably 
objected  to  the  minutiae  of  pietism — in  the  ritual 
sense — when  she  spoke  of  tradition;  she  had  no 
philosophical  conception  of  it.  Leeser  could  hardly 
be  expected  to  set  her  right;  he  was  as  little  of  a 
mystic  as  she  was. 

No  doubt,  however,  she  was  to  this  extent  an 
anti-traditionalist  that  she  thought  the  Bible  in  it- 
self an  all-sufficient  basis  for  Judaism.  Her  book 
is  cast  in  the  form  of  a  commentary  on  theShema' — 
in  fact,  it  is  called  "  Shema  Israel,  the  Spirit  of 
Judaism."  She  begins  by  expounding  the  unity  of 
God;  she  shows  that  it  is  the  real  difference  be- 
tween Synagogue  and  Church;  and  then  ends  her 
chapter  with  a  passionate  plea  for  friendly  inter- 
course between  Jew  and  Christian  on  the  basis  of 
frank  and  unashamed  profession  of  Judaism  by 
the  former.  She  was  absolutely  right.  It  is  not 
merely  the  only  honest,  it  is  also  the  only  stable 
basis  for  such  intercourse. 

To  Grace  Aguilar,  Moses  was  "  the  mouth  of 
God"  (that  is  her  own  phrase).  There  is  noth- 
ing between  a  theory  of  verbal  inspiration  and  the 

250 


GRACE  AGUILAR'S  "  SPIRIT  OF  JUDAISM  " 

belief  that  Moses  "  invented  "  and  <:  presumed  on 
the  ignorance  and  superstition  of  the  rescued 
nation."  With  a  feminine  love  of  italics  she  con- 
tends that  "  we  must  believe  God  framed  every  law 
mentioned  in  the  Mosaic  books  or  none."  How 
crude  this  sounds !  On  the  one  hand,  it  cuts  off  all 
thought  of  inspiration  before  Moses,  on  the  other, 
all  thought  of  it  after  the  close  of  the  scriptural 
canon.  It  would  have  seemed  to  her  almost  blas- 
phemous to  regard  Hillel  as  animated  with  the 
same  spirit  of  God  that  moved  Haggai.  She  dis- 
misses the  "  Oral  Law  "  in  an  aside.  "  The  Bible 
is  the  foundation  of  religion."  Miss  Aguilar  goes 
on  to  complain  that  English  Bibles  were  not  found 
in  Jewish  homes.  But  the  explanation  is  easy.  In 
those  days  it  was  impossible  to  find  an  acceptable 
English  Bible  for  Jewish  use.  The  Authorized 
Version  was  marred  not  only  by  Christological  ren- 
derings, but  also  by  the  Christological  insertions  of 
the  headings  to  the  chapters.  Before  the  publica- 
tion of  the  Revised  Version  it  had  become  possible 
to  obtain  an  Anglican  edition  without  the  headings. 
But  I  doubt  whether  that  was  the  case  so  early  as 
1842.  Moreover,  Jews  have  always  been  slow  to 
acknowledge  that  the  Hebrew  Bible  was  insuffi- 
cient. There  was  much  that  is  creditable  in  this 

251 


BY-PATHS  IN  HEBRAIC  BOOKLAND 

reluctance  to  face  facts ;  though  there  was  also  much 
that  was  dangerous. 

It  is  impossible  to  do  justice  in  a  brief  article  to 
the  intense  love  of  Judaism  shown  in  Miss 
Aguilar's  book.  She  pleads  for  the  religion  with 
persuasive  eloquence;  it  must  appeal  to  the  heart 
and  the  reason ;  it  must  permeate  the  home ;  it  must 
regulate  life.  She  would  have  family  prayers  daily. 
To  this  topic  she  returns  over  and  over  again. 
"  The  youthful  members  of  a  little  domestic  con- 
gregation would  look  back  with  warm  emotion,  in 
after  years,  to  that  period  when,  with  their  brothers 
and  sisters,  they  thronged  around  their  parents  to 
listen  to  the  word  of  God,  and  made  known  their 
common  wants  together."  But  the  thought  that 
dominates  her  whole  book  is  the  perfect  truth  and 
sufficiency  of  Judaism.  It  only  needs  to  be  known 
to  be  preferred  to  every  possible  alternative.  No 
Jew  can  ever  become  lukewarm  if  he  understands 
his  religion.  But  he  must  understand  its  spirit. 
:'  We  know  that  they  who  depart  from  the  faith  of 
their  fathers  are  ever  those  reared  in  the  severest 
obedience  to  mere  forms."  Whereupon  Leeser  in 
his  note  comments :  "  This  is  certainly  a  sweeping 
clause  though  there  is  a  great  deal  of  truth  in  it." 
He  adds  that  the  fault  "  does  not  lie  in  the  forms, 

252 


GRACE  AGUILAR'S  "  SPIRIT  OF  JUDAISM  " 

but  in  the  absence  of  spiritual  education."  That  is 
clearly  the  reason  why  Miss  Aguilar  called  her 
book  "  The  Spirit  of  Judaism."  She  was  no  foe  to 
forms  as  such.  She  strongly  defends  the  dietary 
laws,  in  the  very  chapter  whence  the  last  quotation 
was  taken.  Obedience  is  the  term  writ  large  on 
every  page ;  but  so  is  belief.  When  Judaism  is  be- 
lieved in  and  obeyed,  then  will  redemption  be  nigh, 
release  from  captivity  at  hand,  and  the  advent  of 
the  Messiah  approaching.  But  how  movingly  she 
says  it  in  her  own  fiery  words  1 


253 


ISAAC  LEESER'S  BIBLE 

The  twenty  years  around  the  middle  of  the  nine- 
teenth century  witnessed  the  preparation  of  several 
Jewish  translations  of  the  Bible.  Moses  Mendels- 
sohn had  shown  the  way  in  the  previous  century; 
he  did  not,  however,  produce  a  complete  German 
Bible.  This  was  done  with  success  by  a  body  of 
scholars  led  by  Zunz  (Berlin,  1838).  Ludwig 
Philippson,  in  the  very  next  year,  began  an  enter- 
prise the  accomplishment  of  which  occupied  him 
till  1856.  His  edition  was  not  only  annotated;  it 
was  also  adorned  with  illustrations.  In  1875  the 
Philippson  Bible  came  out  anew  with  the  Dore 
pictures. 

As  for  English  versions  by  Jews,  David  Levi 
edited  the  Pentateuch  in  1787.  But,  to  pass  over 
certain  publications  of  separate  books,  no  complete 
Bible  appeared  in  England  from  a  Jewish  hand  un- 
til the  issue  of  Benisch's  version  (1851-56).  This 
was  a  melancholy  affair.  Real  and  original  scholar- 
ship is  shown  in  every  page.  He  claimed  for  his 
rendering  "  fidelity,  uniformity  and  independence." 
But  he  had  no  sense  for  English  style.  He  un- 

254 


ISAAC  LEESER 
(From  a  Painting  by  Solomon  Nunaz  da 


ISAAC  LEESER'S  BIBLE 

necessarily  and  grotesquely  altered  the  familiar 
words  of  the  Authorized  Version.  Hence,  one  is 
bound  to  speak  of  this  monument  of  learning  and 
earnestness  as  "  melancholy  " ;  it  might  so  easily 
have  been  acceptable.  His  corrections  of  the 
Authorized  were  often  necessary.  Thus,  in  the 
Ten  Commandments  he  rightly  put  "  Thou  shalt 
not  murder  "  for  the  current  "  Thou  shalt  not  kill." 
The  Revised  Version  made  the  same  correction. 
So,  too,  he  was  right  when,  for  historical  reasons, 
he  made  a  change  in  Leviticus  23.  15.  In  the 
Authorized  Version  this  runs :  "  And  ye  shall  count 
unto  you  from  the  morrow  after  the  Sabbath."  But 
by  the  Jewish  tradition  the  Feast  of  Weeks  is  not 
counted  from  a  Saturday  but  from  the  first  day  of 
Passover — on  whatever  day  that  happens  to  fall. 
Hence  Benisch  substituted:  "And  ye  shall  count 
unto  you  from  the  morrow  after  the  day  of  rest." 
Naturally,  too,  he  corrected  certain  dogmatic  preju- 
dices of  the  Anglican  Version. 

Curiously  enough,  Isaac  Leeser  leaves  "  Thou 
shalt  not  kill  "  uncorrected.  But  he  was  vigilant 
with  "  the  morrow  after  the  Sabbath,"  for  which 
he  substitutes  "  the  morrow  after  the  holy  day." 
On  the  other  hand,  he  retained  the  word  "  Sab- 
bath "  (where  the  Hebrew  has  Shabbaton)  applied 

255 


BY-PATHS  IN  HEBRAIC  BOOKLAND 

to  the  first  and  eighth  days  of  Tabernacle,  e.  g.,  Le- 
viticus 23.  39.  This,  however,  he  altered  in  his 
later  editions  to  a  rest;  Benisch  has  strict  rest.  The 
Revised  Version  has  a  similar  correction:  solemn 
rest. 

It  is  not  my  purpose  to  compare  Leeser's  Ver- 
sion with  others.  From  the  hour  when  his  "  Law 
of  God"  appeared  in  Philadelphia,  in  1845, 
Leeser's  Pentateuch  won  the  affectionate  regard  of 
American  Jews.  The  Pentateuch  was  issued  in 
octavo,  in  Hebrew  and  English;  the  whole  of  the 
Bible  came  out  in  quarto,  in  English  alone,  towards 
the  end  of  1853.  From  that  time  it  has  been  often 
reprinted  in  varying  forms,  simply  and  in  editions 
de  luxe.  But  it  is  not  the  printers  who  made  the 
book  popular,  though  I  must  remark  that,  despite 
the  small  public  support  the  enterprise  secured,  the 
1845  Leeser  Pentateuch  is  a  beautiful  specimen  of 
the  printer's  art.  What  made  the  book  was  the 
people's  growing  love  for  Leeser.  Can  higher 
praise  be  given,  can  a  finer  fate  be  wished,  than 
that  a  man's  book  shall  live  in  his  brethren's  hearts 
because  of  him  ? 

This  is  not  the  time  to  criticise  Leeser's  work. 
Like  Benisch,  he  had  no  feeling  for  English  style. 
He  could,  in  the  twenty-third  Psalm,  alter  the  won- 

256 


ISAAC  LEESER'S  BIBLE 

derful  melody  of  "  He  maketh  me  to  lie  down  in 
green  pastures,"  into  "  In  pastures  of  tender  grass 
he  causeth  me  to  lie  down."  He  could  take  the 
haunting  rhythm  of  Job's  "  There  the  wicked  cease 
from  troubling,  there  the  weary  are  at  rest,"  and 
give  us  "  and  where  the  exhausted  weary  are  at 
rest,"  which  is  no  nearer  the  literal  Hebrew  ("  the 
wearied  in  strength  "),  and  is  incomparably  farther 
from  its  beauty.  Or  again,  the  felicitous  opening 
lines  of  the  nineteenth  Psalm,  "  The  heavens  de- 
clare the  glory  of  God ;  and  the  firmament  sheweth 
his  handiwork,"  become  in  Leeser  "  The  heavens 
relate  the  glory  of  God ;  and  the  expanse  telleth  of 
the  works' of  his  hands."  It  is  this  more  than  any- 
thing else  that  made  it  impossible  for  English  Jews 
to  use  Leeser's  Bible.  Revision  of  Leeser  on 
scholarly  grounds  was  also  necessary,  no  doubt. 
Thus,  in  his  rendering  of  Esther  6.  8,  where 
Haman  suggests  the  details  of  the  pageant  in  be- 
half of  the  man  whom  the  king  delighteth  (why 
did  Leeser  substitute  desire th  ?}  to  honor,  Leeser 
has:  "  Let  them  bring  a  royal  apparel  which  the 
king  hath  worn,  and  a  horse  on  which  the  king 
hath  ridden,  and  let  there  be  placed  a  royal  crown 
on  his  head."  But,  as  Ibn  Ezra  had  in  part  al- 
ready pointed  out  (as  Leeser  notes),  and  as  we 
17  257 


BY-PATHS  IN  HEBRAIC  BOOKLAND 

know  to  be  almost  certainly  the  case,  the  crown  was 
for  the  horse's  head.  In  the  Revised  Version  the 
passage  runs :  "  Let  royal  apparel  be  brought 
which  the  king  useth  to  wear,  and  the  horse  that  the 
king  rideth  upon,  and  on  the  head  of  which  a  royal 
crown  is  set." 

Naturally,  in  what  precedes  I  have  turned  to 
familiar  passages.  My  comments  only  touch  the 
fringe  of  the  problem  of  Bible  revision.  In  one 
important  particular,  Leeser  anticipated  the  Re- 
vised Version:  he  arranged  the  English  in  para- 
graphs and  not  in  verses.  Since  Leeser's  day, 
however,  not  only  have  we  learned  more  as  to  the 
precise  meaning  of  words,  but  we  have  won  a 
closer  insight  into  the  idiomatic  use  of  the  Hebrew 
tenses.  The  American  revision,  now  issued  under 
the  auspices  of  the  American  Jewish  Publication 
Society,  has  given  us  at  once  a  scholarly  translation, 
and  one  which  remains  true  to  the  English  excel- 
lences of  the  version  made  in  the  reign  of  King 
James. 

Leeser's  Bible,  therefore,  is  more  or  less  doomed. 
It  cannot  but  pass  out  of  general  use.  But  it  can 
never  pass  out  of  our  esteem  and  affection.  Leeser, 
though  he  indignantly  repudiated  sectarian  bias, 
did  not  translate  the  Bible  as  an  exercise  in  scholar- 

258 


ISAAC  LEESER'S  BIBLE 

ship.  He  belonged  to  those  who  believed  in  the 
Bible.  Quite  naively  he  tells  us  in  his  Preface 
(dated  September  20,  1853)  tnat  ne  ls  "  an  Israel- 
ite in  faith,  in  the  full  sense  of  the  word;  he  be- 
lieves in  the  Scriptures  as  they  have  been  handed 
down  to  us ;  in  the  truth  and  authenticity  of  prophe- 
cies and  their  ultimate  literal  fulfilment."  Nor  did 
he  think  that  the  age  of  miracles  was  past.  He 
admitted  that  there  were  sources  of  information 
which  he  had  not  consulted  when  preparing  his 
Bible.  But  he  had  done  his  best,  and  felt  that  he 
was  therefore  working  with  a  hand  stronger  than 
his  own.  "  I  thought,  in  all  due  humility,  that  I 
might  safely  go  to  the  task,  confidently  relying  upon 
that  superior  aid  which  is  never  withheld  from  the 
inquirer  after  truth."  What  a  combination  of 
sophistication  and  simplicity  we  have  here !  In  the 
mid-nineteenth  century  such  a  union  of  rationalism 
and  faith  was  rare;  it  is  growing  rarer  every  day. 
We  shall  soon  be  thinking  of  putting  Isaac  Leeser's 
memory  in  a  museum  of  Jewish  antiquities  as  a 
specimen  of  a  lost  type. 


259 


LANDOR'S  "ALFIERI  AND  SALOMON" 

There  is  only  one  Jew  in  Landor's  long  series  of 
Imaginary  Conversations,  and  he  was,  most  prob- 
ably, an  invention  of  the  author's.  "  Salomon  the 
Florentine  Jew,"  who  discourses  in  Landor's  pages 
with  Count  Vittorio  Alfieri,  never  existed;  at  all 
events  he  is  not  identifiable.  There  is  no  mention 
of  such  a  person  in  Alfieri's  autobiography;  so 
Landor's  editor — Mr.  C.  G.  Crump — is  careful  to 
point  out.  Still,  Landor  (1775-1864)  spent  sev- 
eral years  in  Florence,  and  it  is  possible  that  he 
heard  of  some  Jewish  worthy  whom  he  used  for 
the  purpose  of  his  dialogue. 

Landor  treats  his  solitary  Jewish  character  with 
courtesy.  "  You  are  the  only  man  in  Florence  with 
whom  I  would  willingly  exchange  a  salutation," 
says  Alfieri  at  the  opening  of  the  conversation. 
Salomon  expresses  himself  as  highly  flattered.  The 
actual  dialogue  is  not  one  of  Landor's  best,  unless 
it  be  for  its  recognition  of  the  sterling  quality  of 
the  English  middle-class.  "  It  is  among  those  who 
stand  between  the  peerage  and  the  people  that 
there  exists  a  greater  mass  of  virtue  and  of  wisdom 

260 


LANDOR'S  "ALFIERI  AND  SALOMON" 

than  in  the  rest  of  Europe."  The  historical 
Alfieri  found  himself  out  of  sympathy  both  with 
kings  and  with  the  French  Revolution  which  de- 
stroyed kingship.  It  was  a  happy  touch  of 
Lander's,  therefore,  to  put  into  Alfieri's  mouth  the 
praise  of  the  class  which  stood  between  royalty  and 
the  masses. 

But  Alfieri  and  Salomon  is  hardly  a  successful 
work  of  art.  It  has  neither  the  romantic  beauty  of 
Lander's  Aesop  and  Rhodope,  nor  the  dramatic  in- 
terest of  his  Hannibal  and  Marcellus.  Naturally, 
however,  it  has  some  good  epigrams.  "  A  poet 
can  never  be  an  atheist,"  says  Lander's  Alfieri.  He 
calls  on  God  to  confound  the  fools  who  always 
eulogize  the  least  praiseworthy  of  princes  because, 
he  complains,  "  the  rascals  have  ruined  my  physi- 
ognomy; I  wear  an  habitual  sneer  upon  my  face." 
How  many  a  genius  has  been  made  similarly  dis- 
agreeable because  he  could  not  suffer  fools  gladly ! 
Very  true  again  is  Alfieri's  paradox  that  the  gravest 
people  are  the  wittiest.  "  Few  men  have  been 
graver  than  Pascal,  few  have  been  wittier."  Had 
Lander's  Florentine  Salomon  been  a  real  Jew,  he 
could  have  capped  Alfieri's  citation  of  Pascal  by 
referring  to  many  a  Jewish  instance,  among  them 
Abraham  Ibn  Ezra.  On  the  contrary,  Salomon 

261 


BY-PATHS  IN  HEBRAIC  BOOKLAND 

disputes  the  truth  of  Alfieri's  statement.  Landor 
is  fond  of  national  generalizations.  "  Not  a  single 
man  of  genius  hath  ever  appeared  in  the  whole  ex- 
tent of  Austria,"  he  makes  Salomon  say;  while 
Alfieri  asserts  that  "  the  Spaniards  have  no  palate, 
the  Italians  no  scent,  the  French  no  ear."  Fortu- 
nately it  did  not  occur  to  Landor  to  sum  up  the 
Jews  in  an  epigram.  He  retained,  however,  the 
eighteenth  century  tolerance,  and  might  have  been 
lenient.  The  only  thing  he  thoroughly  detested  was 
priest-craft,  fanaticism.  His  Salomon  confesses 
that  "  theology  is  without  attraction  "  for  him,  and 
the  saying  came  from  Lander's  heart. 

There  is  not  much  of  the  Jew  in  Salomon.  He 
might  have  been  any  cultured  contemporary  of 
Alfieri.  At  one  point,  however,  he  refuses  to  haz- 
ard a  word  as  to  certain  clerics,  while  Alfieri  freely 
judges  and  condemns  them.  "  The  people  who 
would  laugh  with  you,  would  stone  me,"  says  Salo- 
mon. Was  this  really  true  of  the  end  of  the  eight- 
eenth century  in  Italy?  I  doubt  it.  Landor  is  no 
true  guide  to  the  opinions  of  his  age.  To  continue. 
Landor's  Salomon  speaks  of  Florence  as  his  native 
city;  he  knows  it  and  its  extraordinary  story  in  every 
detail;  he  discusses  its  men  of  genius,  though  he 
admits:  "  My  ignorance  of  Greek  forbids  me  to 

262 


LANDOR'S  "  ALFIERI  AND  SALOMON  " 

compare  our  Dante  with  Homer."  Salomon  is 
through  and  through  Italian.  Perhaps  Landor 
meant  to  depict  him  as  a  Jew  by  putting  into  his 
mouth  a  good  anecdote : 

A  sailor  found  upon  the  shore  a  piece  of  amber;  he  carried 
it  home,  and,  as  he  was  fond  of  fiddling,  began  to  rub  it  across 
the  strings  of  his  violin.  It  would  not  answer.  He  then  broke 
some  pieces  off,  boiled  them  in  blacking,  and  found  to  hi? 
surprise  and  disquiet  that  it  gave  no  fresh  lustre  to  the  shoe- 
leather.  'What  are  you  about?'  cried  a  messmate.  'Smell 
it,  man ;  it  is  amber.'  '  The  devil  take  it,'  cried  the  finder,  '  I 
fancied  it  was  resin ' ;  and  he  threw  it  into  the  sea.  We  despise 
what  we  cannot  use. 

There  is  one  touch  in  Alfieri  and  Salomon  which 
makes  it  look  as  though  the  latter  were  a  real  per- 
sonage. Salomon  urges  Alfieri  to  ignore  his  de- 
tractors and  inferiors,  and  to  be  assured  that, 
though  his  contemporaries  might  belittle  him,  pos- 
terity would  be  more  appreciative. 

Salomon:  All  the  present  race  of  them,  all  the  creatures  in 
the  world  which  excite  your  indignation,  will  lie  in  the 
grave,  while  young  and  old  are  clapping  their  hands  or 
beating  their  bosoms  at  your  Bruto  Primo 

Alfieri:  I  believe,  sir,  you  were  the  first  in  commending  my 
tragedies. 

Salomon:  He  who  first  praises  a  good  book  becomingly  is  next 
in  merit  to  the  author. 

263 


BY-PATHS  IN  HEBRAIC  BOOKLAND 

That  sentence,  "  you  were  the  first  in  commend- 
ing my  tragedies,"  has  a  genuine  ring,  it  is  life-like. 
Had  Landor  any  real  ground  for  believing  that  a 
certain  Florentine  Jew  named  Salomon  or  Solomon 
was  the  first  to  recognize  Alfieri's  genius  for  trag- 
edy? It  is  an  interesting  fact,  if  it  be  a  fact.  Even 
so,  it  has  its  curious  side.  Alfieri  (1749-1803)  was 
a  prolific  writer  of  plays,  but  the  best  of  his  trage- 
dies— and  his  tragedies  as  a  whole  were  superior 
to  his  comedies — was  not  his  Brutus.  It  is  queer 
that  the  Jew  should  forget  which  was  the  best.  It 
was  certainly  Alfieri's  Saul,  published  in  October, 
1784.  It  won  more  success  than  any  other  of  his 
dramas.  His  "  severe  and  unadorned  manner  " 
was  peculiarly  adapted  to  the  rugged  simplicity  of 
the  characters  which  are  presented  in  Saul.  The 
drama  deals  with  the  last  day  of  the  king,  the  scene 
being  laid  in  the  Israelite  camp  on  mount  Gilboa. 
There  are  only  six  characters:  Saul,  Gionata 
(Jonathan),  David,  Micol,  Abner,  Achimelech, 
with  stage  armies  of  "  soldati  israeliti  "  and  "  sol- 
dati  filistei."  Apart  from  the  subtle  contrasts  be- 
tween David  the  warrior  and  David  the  minstrel, 
the  finest  thing  in  the  play  is  the  management  of 
Saul's  insanity.  Indeed,  it  has  been  truly  said  of 
Alfieri :  "  In  the  representation  of  that  species  of 

264 


LANDOR'S  "ALFIERI  AND  SALOMON" 

mental  alienation,  where  the  judgment  has  perished 
but  traces  of  character  still  remain,  he  is  peculiarly 
happy." 

Another  poet  who  was  in  Florence  with  Landor 
also  chose  the  subject  of  Saul  for  one  of  his  most 
dramatic  efforts.  I  refer  to  Robert  Browning,  who 
had  intellectually  much  in  common  with  Landor, 
though  his  temperament  and  philosophy  of  life 
were  quite  other.  Landor  ignored  Alfieri's  Saul, 
Browning  imitated  it.  Earlier,  in  1820,  Joseph 
Ephrathi,  no  doubt  instigated  by  Alfieri's  success, 
produced  a  Hebrew  drama  with  Saul  as  hero. 
Gutzkow  later  on  wrote  a  tragedy  on  the  subject. 
Another  who  treated  of  the  topic  was  Byron.  He 
had  no  likeness  to  Landor,  but  was  not  dissimilar  to 
Alfieri;  both  were  aristocrats,  both  pretended  to 
cynicism,  both  were  versatile  authors,  both  squan- 
derers of  a  great  opportunity.  It  is  strange  that  it 
was  left  to  Alfieri  to  detect  the  dramatic  possibilities 
in  the  tragedy  of  Saul.  Handel's  exploitation  of 
the  theme  was,  naturally,  musical  rather  than  dra- 
matic. In  the  new  freedom  of  the  English  stage  we 
shall,  no  doubt,  soon  have  plays  and  to  spare  on 
the  subject.  Landor,  as  we  have  seen,  makes  no 
use  whatever  of  biblical  personages  for  his  dia- 
logues. But  English  poetry  has  not  done  ill  with 

265 


BY-PATHS  IN  HEBRAIC  BOOKLAND 

Saul's  memory.  Sir  Philip  Sydney,  or  one  of  his 
age,  gave  us  as  beautiful  a  rendering  as  we  need 
wish  of  David's  elegy  over  Saul  and  Jonathan. 
What  could  be  more  lovely  than 

Pleasant  they  were  in  life,  and  fair, 
Nor  yet  did  death  their  love  divide. 

or  than 

Ah!  Jonathan,  my  brother!  lorn 
And  friendless  I  must  look  to  be ! — 

That  heart  whose  woe  thou  oft  hast  borne 
Is  sore  and  stricken  now  for  thee! 

Young  bridegroom's  love  on  bridal  morn, 
Oh!  it  was  light  to  thine  for  me; 

Thy  timeless  lot  I  now  must  plain, 

Even  on  thine  own  high  places  slain! 

How  lowly  now  the  mighty  are, 

How  still  the  weapons  of  the  war ! 

We  have  got  rather  far  from  Landor.  Yet  I 
cannot  but  think  that  the  best  thought  suggested  by 
his  A I  fieri  and  Salomon  is  just  Alfieri's  Saul,  to 
which  the  parties  to  the  "  imaginary  conversation  " 
make  no  allusion. 


PART  V 


PART  V 
BROWNING'S  "  BEN  KARSHOOK  " 

Two  great  literary  forces,  poets  both  yet  both 
greater  in  what  they  said  than  in  how  they  said  it, 
expressed  their  most  intimate  beliefs  on  life  and 
destiny  under  the  guise  of  a  Jewish  personation. 
Nathan  the  Wise,  the  hero  of  Lessing's  drama,  was 
Lessing,  just  as  Rabbi  Ben  Ezra,  the  supposititious 
soliloquist  of  Browning's  poem  was  Browning. 
Lessing,  it  is  certain,  had  a  living  model  in  Moses 
Mendelssohn.  Nathan  was  drawn  from  his  friend. 
Had  Browning  any  such  model?  Yes  and  no. 
Many  a  writer  since  Furnivall  has  identified  the 
hero  of  Browning's  poem  with  Abraham  Ibn  Ezra. 
It  is  probable  that  the  poet  had  him  vaguely  in 
mind.  When,  however,  it  is  sought — as  several 
have  done — to  work  out  the  identity  in  detail,  the 
effort  fails.  The  poet  clearly  meant  to  prevent  any 
such  error.  For  in  Holy-Crass  Day,  he  intro- 
duces a  Rabbi  Ben  Ezra  as  singing  a  "  Song  of 
Death  "  quite  different  in  tone  from  the  poem  in 
which  Rabbi  Ben  Ezra  unfolds  his  scheme  of  life. 

269 


BY-PATHS  IN  HEBRAIC  BOOKLAND 

Browning  obviously  meant  us  to  infer  that  Ben 
Ezra  was  no  one  in  particular. 

Browning's  Hebrew  knowledge  was  probably 
good;  like  his  wife  he  was  apparently  able  to  read 
the  Bible  in  the  original.  He  also  had  dipped  into 
curious,  out  of  the  way  books  on  Jewish  lore.  The 
Rev.  Michael  Adler  cleverly  detected  that  he  owed 
some  of  the  astonishing  Hebrew  words  in  his 
Jocoseria  to  a  little  read  edition  of  the  Itinerary 
of  Benjamin  of  Tudela.  Very  bad  Hebrew  it  is, 
but  its  author  was  not  Browning  but  Baratier  (see 
Jewish  Chronicle,  April  25,  1890).  On  the  other 
hand,  Dr.  Joseph  Jacobs  records  in  the  Jewish 
Quarterly  Review  for  April,  1890,  an  incident 
which  shows  that  the  poet  was  "  shaky  "  in  his  use 
of  Hebrew  names.  One  of  Browning's  most  im- 
portant "  Jewish  "  poems  was  his  Johanan  Hakka- 
dosh,  Johanan  the  Holy.  Dr.  Jacobs  tells  us  that 
the  author  was  about  to  call  this  worthy  "  Hakka- 
dosh  Johanan."  But  "  through  a  common  friend 
I  pointed  out  the  error  to  the  poet,  and  the  adjec- 
tive was  put  in  its  proper  position."  Another  mis- 
conception of  epithets  will  be  noted  below. 

Similarly  with  the  poem  entitled  Ben  Karshook's 
Wisdom.  Who  was  "  Ben  Karshook  "?  I  doubt 
whether  the  writer  could  have  told.  In  the 

270 


BROWNING'S  "BEN  KARSHOOK  " 

Tauchnitz  copy  of  1872,  as  well  as  in  the  English 
edition  of  1889,  as  Mrs.  Sutherland  Orr  points 
out,  the  name  is  spelt  "  Karshish."  Ben  Karshook, 
seems  a  mere  jumble  of  Ben  Hyrkanos.  But  either 
way,  there  was  no  Rabbi  of  the  name.  Elsewhere, 
Browning  employs  the  name  Karshish  to  designate 
an  Arabian  physician.  It  was  one  of  Browning's 
foibles,  to  quote  Dr.  Jacobs  again,  to  give  an  im- 
pression of  recondite  learning.  Ben  Karshook 
would  seem  to  have  been  the  poet's  first  at- 
tempt at  a  Jewish,  as  distinct  from  a  biblical  sub- 
ject. Holy-Cross  Day  was  the  first  to  be  published ; 
it  appeared  in  1855.  Rabbi  Ben  Ezra  came  in 
1864,  Filippo  Baldinucci  in  1876,  Johanan  Hak- 
kadosh  (with  other  Jewish  poems)  in  1883.  This 
list  is  not  a  complete  summary,  but  (if  one  adds 
Abt  Fogler)  it  includes  the  most  important.  Ben 
Karshook' s  Wisdom  was  not  published  until  a  year 
later  than  Holy-Cross  Day,  for  it  was  printed  in 
the  Keepsake  for  1856.  But  it  was  written  on 
April  27,  1854  (according  to  the  statement  of 
Berdoe).  Browning  himself  omitted  the  poem, 
apparently  by  accident,  from  one  of  his  own  vol- 
umes, where  it  is  included  in  the  table  of  contents 
but  not  in  the  book.  He  never  reprinted  it.  The 
result  has  been  that  it  has  often  been  reproduced 

271 


BY-PATHS  IN  HEBRAIC  BOOKLAND 

by  others  for  that  very  reason;  and  now,  though  it 
has  been  given  a  place  in  the  Oxford  Browning,  let 
it  be  printed  again ! 

I. 

"Would  a  man  'scape  the  rod?" 

Rabbi  Ben  Karshook  saith, 
"  See  that  he  turn  to  God 

The  Day  before  his  death." 

"  Ay,  could  a  man  inquire 

When  it  shall  come  ?  "    I  say 
The  Rabbi's  eye  shoots  fire — 
"Then  let  him  turn  to-day." 

II. 

Quoth  a  young  Sadducee: 

"  Reader  of  many  rolls, 
Is  it  so  certain  we 

Have,  as  they  tell  us,  souls?" 

"  Son,  there  is  no  reply !  " 

The  Rabbi  bit  his  beard: 
"  Certain,  a  soul  have  7 — 

We  may  have  none,"  he  sneered. 

Thus  Karshook,  the  Hiram's-Hammer, 
The  Right-hand  Temple-column, 

Taught  babes  in  grace  their  grammar, 
And  struck  the  simple,  solemn. 

272 


BROWNING'S  "BEN  KARSHOOK  " 

The  first  part  is  an  apt  version  of  the  saying  of 
Rabbi  Eliezer,  son  of  Hyrkanos :  "  Repent  one 
day  before  thy  death"  (Pirke  Abot  2.  15). 
Whereon  the  Talmud  (Shabbat  1533)  records  that 
Eliezer's  disciples  asked  Browning's  very  question, 
and  received  precisely  the  same  answer.  The  second 
group  of  stanzas  introduces  us  to  a  young  Sad- 
ducee  who  has  doubts  as  to  the  existence  of  the 
soul.  The  poet  obviously  got  his  information  from 
Mark,  but  was  a  trifle  confused  as  to  what  he  read 
there.  The  Sadducees  (Mark  12.  18)  denied  the 
resurrection,  and  some  have  supposed  their  denial 
to  have  extended  to  the  belief  in  immortality.  (See 
Dr.  Kohler's  remarks  in  the  Jewish  Encyclopedia, 
vol.  x,  p.  631,  top  of  second  column.)  To  Brown- 
ing this  may  have  seemed  equivalent  to  questioning 
the  existence  of  the  soul.  Assuredly,  granted  that 
there  be  a  soul  at  all,  it  must  be  immortal. 

What  is  the  point  of  calling  Karshook  "  Hiram's 
Hammer?  "  Browning  is  probably  drawing  on 
Josephus.  Hiram,  who  helped  in  building  the  tem- 
ple, also  interchanged  difficult  problems  with  Solo- 
mon. (Antiquities,  viii,  5.  3).  Hence,  Browning 
uses  the  name  in  relation  to  these  puzzles,  so  wisely 
answered  in  the  poem.  It  was  also  Hiram — not 
identical  with  the  king  of  Tyre — who  constructed 

1 8  273 


BY-PATHS  IN  HEBRAIC  BOOKLAND 

the  two  temple  columns  Jachin  and  Boaz.  Or,  as 
Dr.  Halper  has  cleverly  suggested,  the  poet  may 
have  had  in  his  mind  a  confused  reminiscence  of  the 
Rabbinic  praise  of  Johanan  ben  Zaccai,  who  (in 
Berakot  28  b.)  is  described  as  Right-hand  Temple- 
column,  Strong  Hammer.  Browning  possibly 
mixed  up  the  Hebrew  hazak  (strong)  with  hiram, 
and  so  transformed  the  epithet  into  "  Hiram's 
Hammer."  If  these  and  similar  reminiscences  were 
passing  through  Browning's  mind,  they  might  well 
result  in  the  verse  which  terminates  with  the  bril- 
liant phrase  "  struck  the  simple,  solemn."  It  needs 
rare  wisdom  to  make  a  fool  think — or  even  better, 
make  him  silent. 

Dr.  Jacobs  well  summed  up  our  indebtedness  to 
Browning  when  he  said  that  "  it  is  not  in  the 
minutiae  of  Hebrew  scholarship  that  we  are  to 
look  for  Browning's  sympathy  with  the  Jewish 
spirit,"  so  markedly  shown  in  his  writings.  Mr. 
Stopford  Brooke  (The  Poetry  of  Robert  Brown- 
ing, 1902,  pp.  33-4)  puts  .the  case  strongly  but 
truly  when  he  declares  that  "  no  English  poet,  save 
perhaps  Shakespeare,  whose  exquisite  sympathy 
could  not  leave  even  Shylock  unpitied,  had  spoken 
of  the  Jew  with  compassion,  knowledge  and  admi- 
ration, till  Browning  wrote  of  him.  The  Jew  lay 

274 


BROWNING'S  "BEN  KARSHOOK" 

deep  in  Browning."  The  writer  of  those  sentences 
no  doubt  would  not  call  Richard  Cumberland  a 
poet;  his  plays  were  friendly  enough  to  the  Jew. 
But  Browning's  understanding  was  more  profound 
than  Cumberland's.  It  is  a  mistake  to  say,  as  a 
recent  critic  has  said,  that  "  Browning  would  have 
us  see  that  the  purest  religion  is  of  any  creed  or 
none."  That  was  perhaps  Lessing's  view.  Brown- 
ing seems  to  go  further.  He  saw  in  Judaism  cer- 
tain elements  of  absolute  truth;  therefore  he 
presented  those  elements  through  Jewish  charac- 
ters. 


275 


K.  E.  FRANZOS'  "  JEWS  OF  BARNOW  " 

George  MacDonald  was  a  novelist  of  distinction. 
When  an  English  translation  of  Ein  Kampf  urns 
Recht  appeared  (under  the  title  For  the  Right), 
MacDonald  wrote  an  introduction.  "  Not  having 
been  asked  to  do  so,  I  write  this  preface  from  ad- 
miration of  the  book."  It  was  a  significant  fact, 
he  continued,  that  the  generation  had  produced  a 
man  capable  of  such  an  ideal  as  the  book  repre- 
sented. It  was  a  work  which  substituted  for  the 
"  half  wisdom  "  of  the  cry  "  art  for  art's  sake  " 
the  whole  wisdom  of  the  cry  "  art  for  truth's 
sake."  And  MacDonald  concluded  as  he  began: 
"  I  have  seldom,  if  ever,  read  a  work  of  fiction  that 
moved  me  with  so  much  admiration."  Mr.  Glad- 
stone, too,  was  among  the  enthusiastic  eulogists  of 
the  novel. 

Its  author  was  Karl  Emil  Franzos,  to  whom  we 
owe,  besides  that  masterpiece  of  his  genius,  For  the 
Right  (1887),  also  the  less  mature  work  of  his 
earlier  years,  The  Jews  of  Barn ow  (1877).  He 
will  always  be  remembered  for  a  saying  of  his 
which  appeared  in  his  first-published  book,  a  nar- 

276 


K.  E.  FRANZOS'  "JEWS  OF  BARNOW" 

rative  of  travel-sketches,  Aus  Halb-Asien  (1876)  : 
Jedes  Land  hat  die  Juden  die  es  verdient  ("  Every 
country  has  the  Jew  that  it  deserves  " ) .  Macaulay 
said  much  the  same  thing,  but  less  epigrammatically, 
nearly  half  a  century  earlier.  It  is  not  a  completely 
satisfactory  generalization,  but  it  is  an  effective 
counter  to  the  cruel  theory  that  every  Jew  gets  the 
country  he  deserves.  "  It  is  not  the  fault  of  the 
Polish  Jews  that  they  are  less  civilized  than  their 
brethren  in  the  faith  in  England,  Germany,  and 
France."  Writing  this  sentence  forty  years  ago, 
Franzos  used  the  word  "  civilized  "  in  a  narrow 
sense.  All  that  it  really  amounted  to  was  that  the 
conventions  of  Barnow  were  not  those  of  Berlin. 
Franzos  makes  quite  a  grim  problem  out  of  the 
Barnow  Jewess's  revolt  against  the  Scheitel,  with- 
out seeing  that  in  point  of  fact  the  revolt  was  only 
one,  and  an  early,  phase  of  the  new  feminist  move- 
ment which  was  to  spread  all  over  the  world. 

What  were  Franzos'  qualifications  for  becoming 
the  historian  of  a  Podolian  ghetto?  He  lived  out 
his  boyhood  there;  and  he  never  lost  the  Jewish 
sympathies  generated  by  his  early  experiences. 
Years  afterwards,  when  he  was  at  the  summit  of 
his  renown,  the  most  famous  Jewish  litterateur  of 
his  age,  he  associated  himself  heartily  at  Berlin 

277 


BY-PATHS  IN  HEBRAIC  BOOKLAND 

with  the  work  being  d6ne  for  Israel  in  Russia. 
The  Barnow  of  his  tales  was  the  Czortkow  of  his 
youth.  Whether  he,  therefore,  presented  a  true 
picture  is  not  so  certain.  He  himself  was  convinced 
that,  though  he  strove  to  give  poetic  value  to  the 
scenes,  he  none  the  less  depicted  the  scenes  accu- 
rately. "  I  have  never  permitted  my  love  of  the 
beautiful  to  lead  me  into  the  sin  of  falsifying  the 
facts  and  conditions  of  life,  and  am  confident  that 
I  have  described  this  strange  and  outlandish  mode 
of  existence  precisely  as  it  appeared  to  me." 
Franzos'  claim  that  he  drew  a  sincere  picture  can- 
not be  disputed,  but  a  sincere  picture  is  not  neces- 
sarily an  accurate  one.  Things  may  not  "  appear  " 
to  one  truly.  How  stands  it  with  Franzos? 

The  Barnow  of  the  tale  is  a  gloomy  little  town, 
and  the  houses  of  its  ghetto  small  and  dirty.  Yet 
it  boasts  the  great  white  mansion  of  its  millionaire; 
it  has  its  real  spring  days  when  the  air  is  deliciously 
soft  and  warm.  And  it  knows  how  to  keep  the 
Sabbath,  how  to  welcome  the  bride  with  an  emo- 
tion which  stirs  its  spirit  to  the  very  depths.  But 
all  the  passion  is  expended  on  the  adoration  of  the 
Divinity.  "  The  same  race  whose  genius  gave 
birth  to  the  Song  of  Songs — the  eternal  hymn  of 
love-^-and  to  whom  the  world  owes  the  story  of 

278 


K.  E.  FRANZOS'  "JEWS  OF  BARNOW" 

Ruth,  the  most  beautiful  idyl  of  womanhood  ever 
known — has  now,  after  a  thousand  years  of  the 
night  of  oppression  and  wandering,  learned  to  look 
on  marriage  as  a  mere  matter  of  business,  by  which 
to  secure  some  pecuniary  advantage,  and  as  a  means 
of  preventing  the  chosen  of  the  Lord  from  dying 
off  the  face  of  the  earth."  The  author  grows  more 
and  more  indignant  as  he  writes :  "  These  men 
know  not  what  they  do — they  have  no  suspicion  of 
the  sin  of  which  they  are  guilty  in  thus  acting." 

This,  for  Franzos,  was  the  tragedy  of  Barnow. 
It  is  the  theme  of  several  of  his  tales.  Sometimes 
it  is  the  boy,  sometimes  the  girl,  who  rides  a-tilt 
against  the  paternal  choice  of  a  mate.  The  father 
selects  for  his  son  or  daughter  the  most  pious  and 
wealthy  partner  available.  They  will  not  know 
each  other,  but  what  of  that?  They  will  have 
plenty  of  time  to  make  acquaintance  after  marriage. 
One  Barnow  father  thus  defends  the  system :  "  We 
don't  look  upon  the  chicken  as  wiser  than  the  hen. 
And,  thank  God,  we  know  nothing  of  love  and  all 
that  kind  of  nonsense.  We  consider  that  two 
things  are  alone  requisite  when  arranging  a  mar- 
riage, and  these  are  health  and  wealth.  The  bride 
and  bridegroom  in  this  case  possess  both."  Franzos 
obviously  regards  this  justification  as  one  of  the 

279 


BY-PATHS  IN  HEBRAIC  BOOKLAND 

v  .outlandish  "  features  of  Barnow's  manners.  But 
were  he  alive  to-day,  he  would  recognize  that 
Moses  Freudenthal,  the  Barnow  father  who  thus 
argues,  was  anticipating  the  latest  formula  of 
Eugenics!  The  novelist,  however,  remorselessly 
sees  only  the  tragedy  and  not  the  amenities  of 
the  system.  From  the  side  of  the  man,  in  the 
story  Nameless  Graves,  Franzos  put  it  thus:  "  As 
a  general  rule,  the  long-haired  Jewish  youth  never 
even  thinks  of  any  girl  until  his  father  tells  him 
that  he  has  chosen  a  wife  for  him.  He  some- 
times sees  his  bride  for  the  first  time  at  betrothal, 
but  in  a  great  many  cases  he  does  not  see  her  until 
his  marriage-day;  and  then,  whether  she  pleases 
him  or  not,  he  makes  up  his  mind  to  get  used  to 
her,  and  generally  succeeds."  But  the  Barnow 
young  men  turn  and  look  at  Lea  as  she  walks  down 
the  street — "  a  thing  hitherto  unknown."  Even  in 
the  Klaus,  when  "  quiet,  dreamy,  and  very  dirty 
Talmudists  bent  over  their  heavy  folios,  her  name 
was  sometimes  mentioned,  followed  by  many  a  deep 
sigh."  A  revolution  in  male  manners,  undoubtedly. 
On  the  other  side,  things  are  even  worse  in 
Barnow.  If  the  men  actually  think  of  choosing 
for  themselves,  the  women  go  and  do  likewise. 
And  with  fatal  results.  Half  educated,  feasting 

280 


K.  E.  FRANZOS'  "  JEWS  OF  BARNOW  " 

on  surreptitious  and  precocious  courses  of  the 
works  of  Paul  de  Kock,  fascinated  by  Christian 
lovers,  the  girls  of  Barnow  go  through  agitating 
experiences,  sometimes  heading  for  the  rocks,  al- 
ways wrecking  the  harmony  of  the  home.  Esther 
and  Chane  differ  only  in  externals;  the  one  openly 
defies  Mrs.  Grundy,  the  other,  in  appearance  only, 
obeys  her.  But  both  are  led  by  passion  to  kick 
over  the  traces ;  both  are  treated  by  Franzos  as  vic- 
tims of  the  loveless  marriage  system.  Esterka 
Regina  makes  renunciation,  but  her  last  act  was  to 
write  to  the  lover — a  Jew  this  time — whom  she 
had  renounced,  practically  to  confess  to  him  that 
her  marriage  had  been  a  failure.  She  had  chosen 
the  course  mapped  out  by  her  parents,  not  from 
motives  of  obedience,  but  because  her  ignorant 
bringing-up  had  unfitted  her  for  the  position  she 
would  have  had  to  occupy  had  she  followed  the  dic- 
tates of  her  heart. 

I  have  hinted  above  my  doubts  whether  Franzos 
drew  for  us  a  correct  picture  of  Barnow  conditions. 
Amid  all  the  realistic  touches,  here  and  there  one 
comes  across  evidence  of  defective  vision.  He 
painted  Barnow  as  he  saw  it,  but  he  did  not  see  it 
as  it  was.  His  father  was  district  physician,  a  real 
friend  of  his  fellow- Jews,  but  not  living  their  life. 

281 


BY-PATHS  IN  HEBRAIC  BOOKLAND 

The  son  saw  Galician  Jewish  life  from  an  aloof 
point  of  view.  It  is  significant  that  in  one  of  his 
tales  he  confuses  the  Friday  eve  with  the  Saturday 
night  prayers.  It  is  a  slip  with  no  serious  conse- 
quences, but  it  does  reveal  the  limitations  of 
Franzos'  knowledge.  None  of  his  tragic  heroines 
strikes  so  convincing  a  note  as  does,  for  instance, 
Bernstein's  graciously  pathetic  Voegele.  Bern- 
stein ceased  to  be  a  Jew,  while  Franzos  remained 
faithful.  Spiritual  fidelity,  however,  does  not  neces- 
sarily carry  with  it  realistic  artistry. 


282 


HERZBERG'S  "  FAMILY  PAPERS  " 

Wilhclm  Herzberg  was  a  victim  to  the  world's 
sensitiveness.  And  a  queer  sensitiveness  it  is !  You 
may  abuse  a  man  as  much  as  you  like,  and  as  un- 
fairly as  you  like,  while  he  is  alive.  But  you  must 
not  speak  harsh,  even  if  they  be  true,  things  of  him 
when  he  is  recently  dead.  De  mortuis  nil  nisi 
bonumf  After  a  decent  interval,  criticism  may  re- 
sume operations.  But  for  the  hour  you  may  only 
say  soft  things  of  the  departed. 

Far  be  from  me  to  deny  that  there  is  an  amiable 
and  humane  side  to  this  convention.  For  my  part, 
I  prefer  to  moderate  my  judgments  while  the  man 
is  still  alive.  I  do  not  admire  over  much  those  who 
bespatter  another  with  abuse  in  his  lifetime,  and 
with  flattery  in  the  moment  of  his  death.  But  the 
world  thinks  differently.  Herzberg  sinned  against 
this  convention;  he  wrote  severely,  even  bitterly, 
and  also  unjustly,  of  an  Anglo-Jewish  worthy  soon 
after  the  interment  of  the  latter.  And  so  he  lost 
his  friends,  and  was  ostracized  here  for  the  rest  of 
his  own  life.  He  resigned  his  post  as  Director  of 
the  Jerusalem  Orphanage — though  probably  for 
other  reasons.  He  died  in  Brussels  in  1898. 

283 


BY-PATHS  IN  HEBRAIC  BOOKLAND 

The  incident  alluded  to  in  these  preceding  lines 
was  typical  of  the  man's  nature.  He  was  not  easy 
to  get  on  with.  He  was  not  so  much  quarrelsome 
as  aggressive.  Witty,  keen-minded,  he  was  above 
all  a  man  of  impulsive  emotions.  He  never  de- 
fended a  cause;  he  always  attacked  its  opponents. 
If  his  fortress  were  besieged,  he  answered  with  a 
sortie;  he  could  not  fight  behind  the  walls.  And 
this  is  true  of  the  wonderful  book  which,  under  the 
pen-name  of  "  Gustav  Meinhardt,"  he  first  pub- 
lished in  Hamburg  in  1868,  calling  it  Judische 
Familienpapiere.  It  is  the  most  brilliant  vindica- 
tion of  Judaism  published  in  the  nineteenth  cen- 
tury. But  it  is  an  attack  on  rival  systems  more  than 
a  mere  apology  for  his  own  religion.  The  author 
throughout  is  plaintiff  rather  than  defendant. 

The  book  consists  of  a  series  of  letters  written 
from  Germany  to  England.  The  author  of  the 
letters  is  a  youth,  Samuel ;  the  recipient  of  them  is 
an  Englishman  of  means,  Samuel's  adoptive  father. 
A  Jew  by  birth,  Samuel  has  been  brought  up  in 
England  as  a  Christian  by  the  kind-hearted  aristo- 
crat, who  found  the  child  destitute  after  the  death 
of  his  real  father,  a  poor  hawker.  And  now  he  is 
sent  home  to  his  Jewish  relatives  on  a  mission — 
he  is  to  convert  them  to  his  new  faith.  The  letters 

284 


HERZBERG'S  "FAMILY  PAPERS" 

describe  Samuel's  arrival  in  the  abode  of  his  uncle, 
Rabbi  Nathan,  and  with  exquisite  charm  unfold 
the  gradual  reversion  of  Samuel  to  his  ancestral 
allegiance.  This  part  of  the  book  is  certainly  con- 
structive enough.  Samuel  is  overwhelmed  with  his 
discoveries.  He  is  fascinated  by  Rabbi  Nathan, 
and  also  by  his  cousin,  Rachel.  I  think  it  would  be 
difficult  to  find  in  literature  a  more  beautiful  de- 
scription of  Jewish  home-life  than  Herzberg  pre- 
sents. No  wonder  that  in  the  end  the  would-be 
converter  becomes  the  converted. 

The  great  part  of  the  argument,  however,  is 
occupied  less  with  showing  the  success  of  Judaism, 
than  the  failure  of  Christianity.  Herzberg  speaks 
out;  there  is  no  hesitation,  no  reserve.  He  never 
loses  his  courteous  manner,  but  this  formal  suavity 
does  not  mitigate  the  truculence  of  the  statements 
he  makes,  the  severity  of  the  arguments  he  uses. 
He  is  one-sided  in  that  he  sets  the  Church's  failure 
against  the  Synagogue's  success,  and  does  not  at- 
tempt to  balance  against  each  other  the  successes  of 
each  and  the  failures  of  each.  But  he  is  confessedly 
an  advocate  and  not  a  judge.  It  is  this  that  makes 
his  book  so  valuable.  It  is  an  outspoken  criticism 
of  modern  culture  by  a  well-equipped  mind.  For 
to  Herzberg,  naturally  and  rightly  enough,  the 

285 


BY-PATHS  IN  HEBRAIC  BOOKLAND 

Church  is  typical  of  Western  civilization.  Attack- 
ing the  former,  he  is  assailing  the  latter,  denying 
the  validity  of  Western — or  rather — Germanic, 
ideals,  and  disputing  their  permanent  worth. 

Before  pointing  out  in  a  sentence  the  significance 
of  this  attitude  for  the  present  condition  of  Jewish 
thought,  one  or  two  other  things  must  be  said  about 
the  book.  There  were  three  German  editions  in 
the  author's  lifetime,  the  third  appearing  in  Zurich 
in  1893.  Why  was  the  third  issue  made  in  Swit- 
zerland and  not  in  Hamburg?  In  the  circular 
announcing  it,  Caesar  Schmidt  made  a  remarkable 
statement.  The  author  had  been  urged  by  his 
friend  to  soften  some  parts  of  it.  He  refused. 
Anti-Semitism  made  the  book,  in  its  unaltered 
shape,  the  more  necessary;  but  it  also  made  it  de- 
sirable to  issue  it  in  "  free  Switzerland."  The 
author  would  have  bettered  the  book  in  one  sense, 
had  he  yielded  to  his  friend's  counsel.  Its  histor- 
ical surveys  are  not  unassailable,  and  its  logic  is 
not  always  perfect.  Yet  to  have  modified  its 
polemical  tone  would  have  been  to  destroy  its  effi- 
cacy. Moreover,  Herzberg's  friends  can  have 
known  little  of  him  if  they  imagined  that  he  would 
alter  even  a  comma  to  please  them !  I  met  him 
several  times  before  1893,  and  I  could  have  told 

286 


HERZBERG'S  "FAMILY  PAPERS" 

them  that  they  were  wasting  their  time  in  giving 
him  advice.  He  always  went  his  own  way;  and  he 
would  have  been  the  last  to  complain  because  that 
way  was  a  rugged  one. 

The  author  had  this  satisfaction :  his  work  was 
enthusiastically  admired  by  a  notable  circle  of 
readers.  Graetz  had  a  high  opinion  of  it.  David 
Kaufmann,  a  lad  of  sixteen  at  the  time  of  its  first 
appearance,  was  its  ardent  eulogist;  to  him  the 
third  edition  is  inscribed.  "  You  will  find  your 
erstwhile  darling  unchanged ;  for  to  change  it  would 
be  to  mangle  it  " — so  writes  Herzberg  to  Kauf- 
mann. One  would  not  talk  of  changing  it  now,  for 
one  does  not  mutilate  classics. 

Kaufmann,  young  as  he  was  in  1868,  was  already 
a  student  of  the  Breslau  Seminary.  Let  another 
student  of  the  same  institution  tell  us  of  the  impres- 
sion the  Family  Papers  made  there.  Dr.  F. 
de  Sola  Mendes  writes  that  "  he  was  yet  studying 
at  the  Breslau  Theological  Seminary  when  the  book 
was  first  brought  under  his  notice  by  a  fellow- 
student,  one  of  its  most  enthusiastic  admirers.  A 
large  number  of  copies  were  at  once  procured  and 
read  with  avidity  by  our  comrades.  It  is  impossi- 
ble to  describe  the  applause  the  book  called  forth ; 
never  had  we  read  so  glowing  and  so  powerful  a 

287 


BY-PATHS  IN  HEBRAIC  BOOKLAND 

vindication  of  pure  Judaism.  We  were  rejoiced 
that  the  country  which  produced  an  Eisenmenger,  a 
Wagenseil,  Schudt,  Pfefferkorn  et  hoc  genus  omne, 
should  have  yielded  in  our  day,  too,  so  triumphant 
a  Defender  of  the  Faith.  Our  venerable  Director, 
Dr.  Frankel,  was  as  enthusiastic  as  any  of  his  young 
disciples  in  its  praise."  The  writer  of  the  lines 
just  quoted  determined  to  render  the  book  into 
English.  "  The  work  of  translation  was  com- 
menced and  carried  on  in  leisure  intervals  for  the 
next  few  years.  In  January,  1874,  in  conjunction 
with  Mr.  A.  Herzberg,  then  of  London,  brother 
of  the  author,  a  prospectus  was  issued  in  England, 
proposing  the  publication  of  the  work  by  subscrip- 
tion. The  project  was  heartily  indorsed  by  the 
Chief  Rabbi  and  Dr.  H.  Adler,  the  latter  of  whom 
kindly  made  valuable  suggestions  as  to  omissions 
and  alterations  proper  in  a  version  to  come  before 
average  English  readers."  One  wonders  what  the 
author  would  have  said  to  such  "  omissions  and 
alterations."  But  the  matter  was  not  taken  up  by 
the  Anglo- Jewish  public,  and  Dr.  Mendes  eventu- 
ally issued  his  excellent  translation  in  New  York 
(1875),  under  the  auspices  of  that  American  Jew- 
ish Publication  Society  which  preceded  the  present 
organization  bearing  the  same  name. 

288 


HERZBERG'S  "FAMILY  PAPERS" 

There  must  clearly  be  much  significance  in  a 
work  which  has  from  time  to  time  aroused  so  much 
feeling.  As  a  boy,  I  read  it  with  mingled  delight 
and  consternation.  Even  then,  unconsciously,  I 
must  have  had  a  premonition  of  its  inner  meaning. 
I  promised  above  to  sum  up  its  import  in  a  sentence, 
and  I  can  do  it.  Herzberg  stands  in  line  with 
Ahad  ha- Am.  The  former  does  not  give  a  Zionist 
turn  to  his  exposition,  nor  does  he  speak  of  a 
Hebrew  culture.  But  he  is  practically  at  the  same 
standpoint.  Civilization  for  the  Jew  must  be  ex- 
pressed in  Jewish  terms.  That  is  the  real  moral  of 
Herzberg's  work.  Now,  as  of  old,  I  face  such  an 
ideal  with  delight,  but  also  with  consternation.  It 
gives  us  back  much  we  were  in  danger  of  losing, 
but  it  tends  to  take  away  from  us  much  that  we  had 
gained. 


280 


Whenever  Handel's  melody  falls  on  one's  ears, 
it  is  impossible  to  miss  the  musical  beauty  of  the 
chorus : 

See  the  conquering  hero  comes, 
Sound  the  trumpets,  beat  the  drums. 

But  the  words  make  one  shudder.  They  are  so 
turgid,  so  inappropriate.  Judas  Maccabaeus,  of  all 
men,  to  strut  forth  to  such  a  welcome — he,  who 
belonged  to  the  first  of  those  who  declared: 

Not  unto  us,  O  Lord,  not  unto  us, 
But  unto  Thy  name  give  glory! 

Tennyson  speaks  of  "  perfect  music  set  unto 
noble  words."  Handel's  music  may  be  as  perfect 
as  art  is  capable  of,  but  his  librettist  betrayed  him 
by  supplying  words  far  from  noble.  They  would 
better  have  suited  Antiochus  than  Judas.  In  fact, 
Handel  originally  wrote  the  melody  for  Joshua 
who  would  have  approved  them  as  little  as  the 
Maccabee. 

We  still  have  to  wait  for  a  really  great  drama 
written  round  Judas  Maccabaeus  as  hero.  The 

290 


LONGFELLOW'S  "JUDAS  MACCABEUS" 

most  has  therefore  been  made  of  Longfellow's  at- 
tempt, which  was  turned  into  Yiddish  by  Belinson 
(1882)  and  into  Hebrew  by  Massel  (1900). 
Judas  is  not  an  easy  character  to  draw.  He  was 
truculent  enough,  yet  there  must  have  been  a  fas- 
cinating sweetness  in  him.  The  key-note  is  struck 
in  a  phrase  supplied  by  the  First  Book  of  the  Mac- 
cabees. He  and  his  brethren  "  fought  with  glad- 
ness the  battle  of  Israel."  The  joyousness  of  duty 
is  a  touch  which  marks  off  the  Maccabees  from  the 
Puritans,  and  which,  developed  in  Israel's  after- 
history,  helped  to  form  the  Jewish  character. 
Longfellow,  who  wrote  his  Judas  Maccabeus 
in  1872,  when  he  had  passed  the  zenith  of  his  pow- 
ers, misses  the  point  altogether. 

Yet  he  realizes  other  aspects  of  his  hero's  dis- 
position. He  partly,  though  not  completely,  shares 
Handel's  mistake  of  turning  Judas  into  a  braggart. 
But  he  atones  by  presenting  very  fully  the  sentimen- 
tality of  the  Maccabee.  To  dub  a  warrior  senti- 
mental may  seem  contradictory,  but  the  finest 
soldiers  have  been  just  the  most  sentimental.  In 
Judas,  sentimentality  shows  itself  chiefly  in  his 
seizing  upon  associations  aroused  by  local  scenery. 
Wherever  he  happens  to  be — so  the  historians  of 
his  age  inform  us — he  recalls  past  incidents  which 

291 


BY-PATHS  IN  HEBRAIC  BOOKLAND 

occurred  there.  Here,  again,  we  have  in  Judas  a 
quality  which  afterwards  became  a  deep-seated 
characteristic  of  the  Jew,  his  romanticism.  Long- 
fellow was  himself  a  romantic  as  well  as  a  Puritan, 
and  perfectly  presents  this  side  of  Judas's  dis- 
position. Thus  at  Beth-horon  Judas  recalls  how, 
on  the  same  battlefield,  Joshua, 

The  great  captain  of  the  hosts  of  God, 

A  slave  brought  up  in  the  brick-fields  of  Egypt, 

O'ercame  the  Amorites.     There  was  no  day 

Like  that,  before  or  after  it,  nor  shall  be. 

The  sun  stood  still ;  the  hammers  of  the  hail 

Beat  on  their  harness;   and  the  captains  set 

Their  weary  feet  upon  the  necks  of  kings, 

As  I  will  upon  thine,  Antiochus, 

Thou  man  of  blood ! — Behold,  the  rising  sun 

Strikes  on  the  golden  letters  of  my  banner, 

Be  Elohim  Yehovahf    Who  is  like 

To  thee,  O  Lord  among  the  gods? — Alas! 

I  am  not  Joshua,  I  cannot  say, 

"  Sun,  stand  thou  still  on  Gibeon,  and  thou  Moon 

In  Ajalon!  "     Nor  am  I  one  who  wastes 

The  fateful  time  in  useless  lamentation: 

But  one  who  bears  his  life  upon  his  hand 

To  lose  it  or  to  save  it,  as  may  best 

Serve  the  designs  of  Him  who  giveth  life. 

The  "  nor  shall  be  "  which  closes  the  fourth  line 
of  this  quotation  is  a  false  note.     The  Maccabee 

292 


LONGFELLOW'S  "JUDAS  MACCABEUS" 

did  expect  to  repeat  Joshua's  glory;  that  expecta- 
tion of  recurrent  providences  was  the  basis  of 
Israel's  belief  in  Providence.  Again,  even  though 
in  his  day  Hebrew  had  given  way  to  Aramaic  as 
the  national  speech  (let  some  of  our  Hebrew 
xealots  remember  that  Judas  Maccabaeus  did  not 
talk  in  Hebrew !),  none  the  less  Judas  would  hardly 
have  been  guilty  of  the  error  to  begin  a  Hebrew 
sentence  in  the  middle.  Yet  Longfellow  repeats 
this  curious  slip  later  on,  making  Judas  rush  to  bat- 
tle, shouting  Be  Elohim  Yehovahf  as  though 
"  Among  the  gods,  O  Lord  "  (for  that  is  what  the 
Hebrew  words  mean)  could  possibly  be  a  war-cry. 
No  doubt  he  knew  that  in  one  theory  the  name 
Maccabee  is  explained  as  the  initials  of  the  Hebrew 
text  "  Who  is  like  unto  Thee  among  the  mighty 
(or  the  gods),  O  Lord."  But  it  was  a  queer  con- 
fusion that  made  him  employ  the  second  half  of 
the  verse  as  a  signal,  and  to  substitute  elohim  for 
the  dim  of  the  Song  of  Moses  (Exod.  15.  1 1 ) .  I 
say  nothing  of  his  putting  into  Judas'  mouth  the 
monstrosity  Yehovah — a  misspelling  (more  com- 
mon in  the  form  Jehovah)  which  was  invented 
about  the  year  1520  by  the  reformers.  As  is  well 
known,  the  misspelling  arose  by  reading  the  vowels 
of  adonai  (Lord),  as  the  Name  was  quite  early 

293 


BY-PATHS  IN  HEBRAIC  BOOKLAND 

read,  with  the  consonants  of  the  Name  as  written  in 
the  Hebrew  text. 

In  another  aspect  Longfellow  is  perhaps  un- 
fairly kind  to  Judas.  Henry  V,  as  Shakespeare 
drew  him,  was  something  of  a  braggadocio.  But 
the  dramatist  might  almost  have  been  thinking  of 
Judas  when  he  makes  his  Henry  exclaim  before 
Agincourt:  "  I  pray  thee,  wish  not  one  man  more." 
Judas,  too,  knew  that  much  of  the  glory  of  victory 
depended  upon  the  success  of  the  few  over  the 
many,  "  the  fewer  men  the  greater  share  of 
honour."  Judas,  unlike  Henry,  would  have  meant 
the  more  signal  would  be  the  revelation  of  God's 
power,  if  the  human  means  by  which  the  battle  was 
won  were  weaker.  On  the  other  hand,  the  Books 
of  the  Maccabees  do  not,  so  far  as  one's  memory 
goes,  indicate  that  Judas,  any  more  than  Henry, 
was  chivalrous  in  the  narrower  sense.  The  Jewish 
exemplar  of  the  chivalrous  warrior  is  David  not 
Judas.  Longfellow,  however,  presents  Judas  as 
the  chivalrous  knight.  One  hesitates  what  to  think 
of  the  third  scene  in  Act  III  of  Longfellow's  play. 
In  "  mysterious  guise,"  Nicanor  enters  the  Jewish 
camp,  a  herald  "  unheralded,"  gliding  "  like  a  ser- 
pent silently "  into  the  very  presence  of  Judas. 
Nicanor  discovers  himself. 

294 


LONGFELLOW'S  "JUDAS  MACCABEUS" 

Judas:   Thou  art  indeed  Nicanor.    I  salute  thee. 
What  brings  thee  hither  to  this  hostile  camp 
Thus  unattended? 

Nicanor:    Confidence  in  thee. 

Thou  hast  the  noble  virtues  of  thy  race, 
Without  the  failings  that  attend  those  virtues. 
Thou  can'st  be  strong,  and  yet  not  tyrannous, 
Can'st  righteous  be  and  not  intolerant. 
Let  there  be  peace  between  us. 

Judas:    What  is  peace? 

Is  it  to  bow  in  silence  to  our  victors? 

Is  it  to  see  our  cities  sacked  and  pillaged? 

Our  people  slain,  or  sold  as  slaves,  or  fleeing 

At  night-time  by  the  blaze  of  burning  towns; 

Jerusalem  laid  waste;  the  Holy  Temple 

Polluted  with  strange  gods?    Are  these  things  peace? 

This  is  cleverly  conceived.  Nicanor's  degrading 
compliments  as  well  as  his  false  offer  of  peace  are 
rejected  with  due  scorn.  Longfellow  probably  got 
the  idea  for  this  scene  from  the  story  told  of  Mat- 
tathias,  to  whom  the  Syrian  envoys  made  overtures, 
which  the  dour  father  of  the  Maccabee  knew  how 
to  treat.  But  what  one  doubts  is  whether  Nicanor 
would  have  trusted  himself  to  the  Maccabean 
camp.  The  scene  ends : 

Judas:    Go  to  thy  tents. 
Nicanor:    Shall  it  be  war  or  peace? 

295 


BY-PATHS  IN  HEBRAIC  BOOKLAND 

Judas:    War,  war,  and  only  war.     Go  to  thy  tents 
That  shall  be  scattered,  as  by  you  were  scattered 
The  torn  and  trampled  pages  of  the  Law, 
Blown  through  the  windy  streets. 

Nicanor:    Farewell,  brave  foe ! 

Judas:    Ho,  there,  my  captains!     Have  safe  conduct  given 
Unto  Nicanor's  herald  through  the  camp, 
And  come  yourselves  to  me. — Farewell,  Nicanor! 

One  wonders  whether  such  an  end  to  such  a 
scene  were  possible?  Still,  if  David  would  have 
acted  thus  generously,  why  not  Judas?  We  must 
allow  for  the  insight  of  genius.  Longfellow  may 
have  understood  the  story  more  truly  than  his  critic. 
If  to  the  valor,  the  recklessness  of  self,  the  roman- 
ticism, the  all-pervading  joyousness  of  Judas,  we 
may  add  the  trait  of  generosity,  then  is  he  indeed 
among  the  noblest  models  of  chivalry  which  his- 
tory can  show. 


296 


ARTOM'S  SERMONS 

When,  in  February,  1873,  Haham  Artom  was 
pressed  to  publish  a  selection  of  his  Sermons,  he 
consented,  but  with  reluctance.  For,  said  he,  "  I 
am  fully  aware  of  the  difficulty  of  speaking  and 
writing  in  a  language  which  is  not  my  own  ...» 
a  language  which,  some  years  ago,  was  unknown 
to  me."  Artom  never  lost  his  Italian  accent,  and 
the  slight  survival  of  his  native  idiom  added  grace 
to  his  English  orations.  He  was  an  attractive  fig- 
ure in  the  pulpit;  and  as  effective  as  attractive. 

He  died  in  1879.  Having  frequently  heard  him 
preach,  having,  indeed,  been  present  when  many  of 
these  very  addresses  were  first  given,  I  have  again, 
after  more  than  forty  years,  turned  to  the  printed 
volume.  Is  any  of  the  fire  left?  Has  all  the  charm 
evaporated?  His  commanding  presence,  his  beau- 
tiful voice,  his  dramatic  gestures,  his  extempore 
delivery  of  carefully  prepared  impromptus — were 
these  mannerisms  answerable  for  the  whole  of  Ar- 
tom's  power,  or  was  there  something  forceful  and 
persuasive  in  the  matter?  In  a  word,  do  the 
speeches  survive  the  speaker? 

Let  us  remember,  first  and  last,  that  Artom  was 
an  artist.  He  not  only  wrote  verses,  but  he  com- 

297 


BY-PATHS  IN  HEBRAIC  BOOKLAND 

posed  music;  some  of  his  melodies  are  still  sung  in 
the  Sephardic  synagogues.  He  was  also  an  artist 
in  prose.  This  gift  sometimes  led  him  astray.  The 
faults  of  the  speaker  certainly  remain  in  the 
speeches.  The  passages  which  sounded  grotesque 
in  the  hearing,  strike  one  in  the  reading  as  more 
grotesque  still.  For  instance,  in  his  sermon 
(November  7,  1874)  against  Cremation,  he  de- 
scribes in  lurid  detail  the  scene  at  the  burning  of  the 
body,  and  then  he  proceeds:  "  A  sad  and  repeated 
crackling  is  soon  heard;  the  combustion  is  going  on 
rapidly.  But  to  my  ears  that  crackling  seems  to  be 
the  complaint  of  the  dead  person  for  being  treated 
with  such  cruelty  and  disrespect." 

This  is  sentimentalism  at  its  falsest.  Obviously, 
such  faults  of  the  orator  endure.  Have  his  merits 
the  same  lasting  quality?  The  question  may  be 
confidently  answered  in  the  affirmative. 

He  showed  true  artistry  in  structure.  A  preacher 
must  be  a  builder.  He  has  to  construct  a  work  of 
art.  Not  merely  in  the  sense  of  form,  but  also  and 
chiefly  in  substance.  Judaism  is  the  home  beauti- 
ful ;  it  fascinates  the  eye,  but  it  also  provides  rooms 
for  living.  Artom  entertained,  and  he  also  fed  his 
guests.  Out  of  his  sermons  you  could  easily  piece 
together  a  fine  edifice  of  Judaism.  Many  of  its 

298 


ARTOM'S  SERMONS 

greatest  truths  are  there,  presented  very  solidly, 
and  for  all  his  decorative  art  very  simply.  Artom 
was  not  a  thinker,  he  was  a  believer.  Yet,  though 
he  never  felt  a  doubt,  he  always  realized  that  there 
were  people  who  differed  from  him.  He  was  thus 
frequently  controversial ;  he  had  in  mind  some  other 
opinions  which  he  was  determined  to  combat.  This 
method  impelled  him  to  present  religion  in  relation 
to  the  realities  of  his  day.  No  preacher  can  be 
effective,  unless  he  does  so;  no  preacher's  words 
endure  for  other  times,  unless  they  are  first  vital  for 
his  own. 

In  another  respect,  Artom's  method  justified  it- 
self. I  refer  to  his  use  of  rabbinic  quotations.  He 
seldom  quoted  anything  else.  Here  we  have,  in 
part,  a  mere  trick,  a  mechanical  device,  artificial 
rather  than  artistic.  Every  sermon  is  headed  by 
two  texts,  the  one  scriptural,  the  other  rabbinic.  In 
those  olden  Jewish  homilies  called,  from  their 
opening  formula,  Yelammedenu  a  similar  plan 
was  followed,  but  the  rabbinic  passage  was  legal, 
involving  some  problem  of  Halakah  or  practi- 
cal laws.  Artom's  citations  are  always  homileti- 
cal,  and  rarely  add  to  the  effect  of  the  biblical  text. 
Mechanical,  too,  is  the  division  of  each  address 
into  a  Prologue,  followed  by  three  parts,  ending 

299 


BY-PATHS  IN  HEBRAIC  BOOKLAND 

with  an  Epilogue  culminating  in  a  prayer.  The 
whole  congregation  almost  invariably  rose  at  the 
close  of  the  Haham's  sermons,  to  join  in  these 
prayers,  spoken  with  genuine  but  never  unctious 
fervor.  Such  severe  divisions  of  the  sermon  were 
long  de  rigueur  on  the  continent.  Nowadays,  in 
the  reaction  against  these  fetters,  sermons  tend  to 
lose  form  altogether.  But  where  Artom  showed 
himself  a  master  was  in  his  use  of  Midrash  in  the 
body  of  his  addresses.  He  had  nothing  like  the 
theological  profundity  of  Jellinek,  who  employed 
Midrash  to  enforce  fundamental  ideas  with  sub- 
tlety. Nor  had  he  Jellinek's  power  of  "  holding  the 
Midrash  in  chemical  solution."  As  Mr.  Singer — 
a  greater  preacher  far  than  Artom —  said  in  his 
Memoir  of  Jellinek,  midrashic  quotations  in  a 
sermon  are  as  a  rule  "  stuck  clumsily  into  the 
discourse,  and  leave  upon  the  palate  the  flavour 
of  undissolved  spice  or  sugar  in  an  ill-prepared 
Sabbath  or  Festival  dish.  In  Jellinek  the  assimi- 
lation is  perfect.  It  is  the  bone  of  his  bone  and  flesh 
of  his  flesh.  Whether  the  Midrash  or  the 
preacher's  theme  came  first,  which  went  the  longer 
way  to  meet  the  other,  is  often  as  uncertain  to  de- 
termine as  the  question,  in  the  case  of  some  of  the 
finest  songs,  whether  the  music  suggested  the  words, 
or  the  words  the  music." 

300 


ARTOM'S  SERMONS 

Artom  did  not  reach  the  perfection  of  Jellinek, 
but  he  never  sank  to  the  level  of  the  botcher.  What 
he  aimed  at  he  succeeded  in  attaining.  If  his  rab- 
binic quotations  at  the  beginning  of  a  discourse 
were  perfunctory,  those  which  he  made  in  the 
body  of  the  discourse  were  invariably  to  the  point; 
they  always  interpreted.  He  did  not  merge 
Midrash  into  his  own  personality  as  Jellinek  did. 
But  he  employed  it  as  a  certain  type  of  painter  does 
the  accessories  to  a  picture,  to  add  color,  to  relieve 
the  severity  of  the  main  idea,  to  suggest  outwardly 
that  which  he  is  not  quite  able  to  express  inwardly. 
Hence  he  usually  quoted  obvious  Midrashim,  and 
used  them  in  an  obvious  sense.  He  showed  his 
wisdom  in  this.  If  a  painter  puts  in  a  camel  to 
help  me  to  perceive  that  he  is  representing  a  desert, 
he  must  be  very  careful  to  make  his  camel  recog- 
nizable. It  will  not  do  to  give  me  a  symbolical 
"  Ship  of  the  Desert,"  it  must  be  a  camel,  palpable 
and  conventional.  Within  his  limitations,  he  shows 
himself  the  better  artist  the  less  he  tries  to  make 
his  accessories  bizarre  or  even  original. 

I  trust  that  no  one  will  suspect  me  of  a  desire  to 
"  damn  with  faint  praise."  On  the  contrary,  start- 
ing with  the  unquestionable  fact  that  the  living 
Artom  was  a  great  preacher,  my  intention  was  to 

301 


BY-PATHS  IN  HEBRAIC  BOOKLAND 

indicate  what  we  have  to  keep  in  mind  if  we  would 
admire  his  printed  addresses  as  they  deserve.  If 
we  know  what  to  expect  from  them  we  shall  find  it. 
Take  the  following  paragraph: 

"  Our  sages  said  that  '  a  precious  jewel  hung 
around  the  neck  of  Abraham.'  It  was  not  a  talis- 
man, an  amulet,  supposed  by  the  superstitious  to 
keep  away  the  consequence  of  envy,  of  evil  eye ;  the 
jewel  was  the  knowledge  of  the  Lord,  of  the  one 
God,  of  the  Omnipotent  Being,  that  knowledge 
which  Abraham  disseminated  among  men;  it  was 
the  spiritual  jewel  which  ought  to  be  treasured  in 
the  heart  of  every  good  man,  of  every  true  Israelite. 
We  have  inherited  that  Jewel,  we  have  it  still.  Oh, 
let  us  wear  it  with  pride,  for  it  is  the  noblest  deco- 
ration." 

There  are  a  hundred  such  passages  in  Artom's 
volume.  They  got  home  when  the  orator  pro- 
nounced them,  and  they  get  home  still  when  calmly 
read  as  literature.  It  is  perhaps  curious  that  a 
preacher  who  in  his  day  was  admired  for  his  bril- 
liance, should  endure  less  for  the  sparkle  than  for 
the  substance  of  what  he  said.  That  is,  however, 
the  common  fate  of  orators.  Happy  they,  if  their 
utterances  have  worth  after  the  personality  behind 
them  has  passed  away. 

302 


SALKINSON'S  "  OTHELLO  " 

One  of  the  first  writers  to  combat,  on  the  conti- 
nent of  Europe,  Voltaire's  depreciation  of  Shake- 
speare was  Lessing.  But  his  eulogy  was  dated 
1759.  A  year  earlier  (1758)  Moses  Mendels- 
sohn, in  his  essay  on  the  Sublime,  had  anticipated 
Lessing's  judgment.  But  his  influence  did  not  lead 
the  new-Hebrew  school  to  translate  Shakespeare. 
It  was  not  till  near  the  middle  of  the  nineteenth 
century  that  we  find  Hebrew  translations  even  of 
such  famous  soliloquies  as  Hamlet's  "  To  be  or  not 
to  be."  In  1842  Fabius  Mieses  and  in  1856  N.  P. 
Krassensohn  rendered  the  passage.  Both,  how- 
ever, were  dependent  on  Mendelssohn,  translating 
his  German  rendering.  Others,  at  the  same  period, 
turned  a  few  passages,  including  one  of  Richard 
II's  monologues,  from  German  versions  into 
Hebrew. 

"  To-day  we  exact  our  revenge  from  the  Eng- 
lish !  They  took  our  Bible  and  made  it  their  own. 
We,  in  return,  have  captured  their  Shakespeare. 
Is  it  not  a  sweet  revenge?"  With  these  words 
Smolenskin  opened  his  introduction  to  Salkinson's 
Hebrew  translation  of  Othello. 

303 


BY-PATHS  IN  HEBRAIC  BOOKLAND 

It  is  not  easy  to  explain  how  it  happened  that  we 
had  to  wait  till  1874  for  the  first  Hebrew  adapta- 
tion of  a  Shakespearean  drama.  In  fact,  with  the 
exception  of  Salkinson's  Romeo  and  Juliet  (1878), 
S.  L.  Gordon's  King  Lear  (1899),  and  Isaac 
Barb's  Macbeth  (1883),  I  know  of  no  Hebrew 
version  of  plays  by  the  author  of  Hamlet,  which 
latter  drama  so  far  as  I  have  observed,  has  not  even 
been  printed  in  Yiddish.  (  Dr.  Halper,  however,  in- 
forms me  that  Hamlet  was  translated  into  Hebrew 
by  H.  J.  Bornstein,  and  that  his  version  appeared  in 
the  pages  of  Ha-Zefirah  somewhere  about  1900). 
Julius  Casar  appeared  in  Yiddish  in  1886.  King 
Lear  has  also  been  printed  in  the  same  language, 
and  the  Merchant  of  Venice  received  the  same 
honor,  at  the  hand  of  Basil  Dahl,  in  New  York,  in 
1899.  I  use  the  words  "  printed  in  Yiddish  "  ad- 
visedly, because  there  are  extant  in  manuscript  act- 
ing versions  of  other  plays  used  by  Yiddish 
companies.  Of  course,  select  passages  from  Shakes- 
peare have  often  been  rendered  into  Hebrew,  as, 
for  instance,  in  that  curious  publication  Young's 
Israelitish  Gleaner  and  Biblical  Repository,  Edin- 
burgh, 1855  (pp.  24,  16).  The  lack  of  Hebrew 
translations  may  be  explained  by  two  considera- 
tions. The  Merchant  of  Venice,  despite  its  sympa- 

304 


SALKINSON'S  "  OTHELLO  " 

thetic  treatment  of  some  aspects  of  Shylock's  char- 
acter, dealt  so  deadly  a  blow  at  the  Jews,  that 
there  could  be  no  enthusiasm  with  regard  to  the 
other  works.  But  more  operative  was  another 
fact.  The  available  Hebraists  for  the  most  part 
were  ignorant  of  English.  The  Macbeth  men- 
tioned above  was  translated  not  from  the  original, 
but  from  Schiller's  German. 

There  is  a  further  consideration  (for  after  all 
Schlegel's  fine  German  version  was  at  hand  for 
those  who  knew  no  English).  Drama  in  Hebrew, 
whether  original  or  translated,  has  always  been 
spasmodic.  Drama  needs  an  audience.  Until  the 
Hebrew  revival  become  wider  spread,  there  can 
never  be  a  sufficiently  popular  demand  for  the 
presentation  of  Hebrew  plays  to  encourage  or  cul- 
tivate the  composition  of  them.  It  will  no  doubt 
be  otherwise  in  the  new  Palestine.  Indeed  we  al- 
ready read  of  plans,  instituted  by  M.  James  Roth- 
schild, to  organize  a  Hebrew  Drama  in  Judaea. 

Isaac  Edward  (Eliezer)  Salkinson,  however, 
knew  English  well.  He  was  also  gifted  with  a  fine 
command  of  Hebrew,  which  he  wrote  not  only 
fluently,  but  in  real  poetic  style.  He  was  born  in 
Wilna,  being  perhaps  the  son  of  Solomon  Salkind, 
himself  a  writer  of  meritorious  Hebrew  verse 
20  '  305 


BY-PATHS  IN  HEBRAIC  BOOKLAND 

(Jewish  Encyclopedia,  vol.  x,  p.  651).  Unfortu- 
nately, a  knowledge  of  Hebrew  does  not  of  itself 
suffice  to  keep  a  Jew  within  the  pale  of  the  Syna- 
gogue. "  As  a  youth,  Salkinson  set  out  for  Amer- 
ica with  the  intention  of  entering  a  rabbinical 
seminary  there;  but  while  in  London  he  was  met 
by  agents  of  the  London  Missionary  Society,  and 
was  persuaded  to  forsake  Judaism."  The  Syna- 
gogue lost  in  him  one  of  the  most  accomplished 
Hebraists  of  modern  times. 

But  though  he  was  lost,  his  work — or  some  of 
it — remains  to  us,  and  we  ought  not  to  let  it  go. 
Nahum  Slousch  makes  an  admirable  remark  on  the 
subject  in  his  Renascence  of  Hebrew  Literature 
(p.  245).  Salkinson's  first  great  translation  was 
not  of  Shakespeare,  but  of  Milton.  In  1871  ap- 
peared a  delightful  Hebrew  version  of  Paradise 
Lost.  It  was  a  masterly  rendering,  attaining  almost 
to  absolute  perfection.  Take  Salkinson's  title.  He 
called  it  Fayegaresh  et  ha-adam  ("  So  He  drove 
out  the  man,"  from  Genesis  3.  24).  How  much 
apter  it  is  for  Paradise  Lost  than  Meir  Letteris 
Ben  Abuyah  for  Goethe's  Faust.  Salkinson's  ver- 
sion is  genuine  Milton.  "  It  was  a  sign  of  the 
times,"  says  Slousch  of  Salkinson's  rendering  of 
an  epic  so  Christian  in  character,  "  that  this  work 

306 


SALKINSON'S  "  OTHELLO  " 

of  art  was  enjoyed  and  appreciated  by  the  educated 
Hebrew  public  in  due  accordance  with  its  literary 
merits."  It  was,  in  brief,  an  indication  that  Jewish 
readers  of  Hebrew  were  discriminating  between 
form  and  substance.  Many  who  are  as  old  as  I  am 
can  recall  a  similar  change  in  feeling  with  regard  to 
pictures.  To  go  through  a  great  Art  Gallery  was 
a  tax  on  one's  forbearance.  Madonnas  at  every 
turn  offended  the  Jewish  consciousness.  Now, 
however,  a  large  number  find  it  quite  easy  to  ad- 
mire an  artist's  talent  irrespective  of  the  subject. 
Yet  Josef  Israels  never  painted  a  Madonna,  though 
he  was  strongly  urged  to  do  so  by  eminent  ad- 
mirers of  his  genius. 

In  the  case  of  Shakespeare's  Othello  no  such 
problem  as  this  arises.  In  finding  a  Hebrew  title 
for  it,  Salkinson  did  not  seek  for  any  paraphrase. 
He  just  searched  for  a  Hebrew  name  which  would 
sound  like  "  Othello,"  and  he  found  it  in  the  biblical 
"  Ithiel,"  which  may  signify  "  God  is  with  me." 
"  Ithiel "  would  thus  mean  much  the  same  as 
"  Immanuel  "  ("  God  is  with  us  ").  It  cannot  be 
asserted  that  "  Ithiel  "  fails  to  correspond  in  sense 
with  "  Othello,"  for  the  simple  reason  that  no  one 
seems  to  know  what  "Othello"  means;  Ruskin 
suggested  the  sense  careful.  On  the  other  hand, 

307 


BY-PATHS  IN  HEBRAIC  BOOKLAND 

"  lago  "  is  probably  a  variant  of  "  Jacob  " ;  Salkin- 
son  calls  him  Doeg:  there  is  some  similarity  in 
character,  as  in  a  name,  between  the  false  Doeg 
and  the  wily  lago.  The  other  names  call  for 
little  comment.  Desdemona  becomes  Asenath, 
not  a  happy  choice,  for  while  Desdemona  appar- 
ently means  the  "  unfortunate,"  Asenath  is  prob- 
ably the  Egyptian  for  the  "  Favorite  of  Neith." 
Cassio  is  Cesed — a  mere  assonance.  On  the  other 
hand,  the  Clown  is  Lez  (the  scoffer)  ;  this  is 
a  reproduction  of  meaning,  not  of  sound.  After 
all,  not  the  names,  but  the  play  is  the  thing. 
Salkinson  certainly  gives  us  the  play.  His  Hebrew 
is  the  real  Shakespeare.  Often  have  I  found  in 
difficult  passages  of  the  English  that  the  Hebrew 
is  a  useful  help  to  the  understanding  of  the  original. 
Sometimes  a  hasty  reader  of  Salkinson  may  think 
that  the  translator  erred,  as  in  his  rendering  of 
Othello's  last  pathetic  speech : 

Speak  of  me  as  I  am;  nothing  extenuate, 

Nor  set  down  aught  in  malice:  then  must  you  speak 

Of  one  that  loved  not  wisely  but  too  well ; 

Of  one  not  easily  jealous,  but  being  wrought, 

Perplex'd  in  the  extreme ;  of  one  whose  hand, 

Like  the  base  Indian,  threw  a  pearl  away 

Richer  than   all   his  tribe. 

308 


SALKINSON'S  "  OTHELLO  " 

Salkinson  turns  these  last  two  lines  into : 

Like  the  despicable  Jeia,  who  threw  a  pearl  away 
Richer  than  all  the  wealth  of  Israel. 

It  is  no  mistake.  There  is  good  authority  for 
reading  Judean  in  the  English  text  in  place  of 
Indian.  The  most  plausible  suggestion  is  Theo- 
bald's, that  Shakespeare  was  referring  to  Herod 
and  Mariamne.  The  whole  of  this  speech  is  a 
triumph  of  literalness  combined  with  beauty  of 
phraseology.  If  Salkinson  had  only  written  this 
one  page  he  would  be  famous  among  modern 
Hebraists. 

Othello  was  done  into  Hebrew  at  the  suggestion 
of  Perez  Smolenskin,  himself,  of  course,  a  noted 
pioneer  of  the  new-Hebrew  school.  Smolenskin 
was  delighted  with  Salkinson's  performance. 
"  See,"  he  cried,  "  how  Shakespeare  lends  himself 
to  Hebrew.  While  so  many  are  translating  into 
Hebrew  works  utterly  foreign  to  the  Hebraic  spirit, 
here  we  have  one  who  has  chosen  a  poem  which 
lies  near  to  that  spirit."  There  is  much  truth  in 
this  contention.  English  does  very  readily  lend 
itself  to  translation  into  Hebrew,  just  as  is  the  case 
when  the  relation  is  reversed.  No  version  of  the 
Hebrew  Bible,  not  even  Luther's,  has  ever  ap- 
proached the  English  in  its  fidelity  to  the  soul  of  the 

309 


BY-PATHS  IN  HEBRAIC  BOOKLAND 

original.  But  Smolenskin  goes  on  to  use  another 
argument,  which  is  somewhat  amusing.  He  draws 
a  picture  of  the  Jewry  of  his  day,  and  then  exclaims : 
Lo !  here  are  the  very  conditions  presented  to  us  in 
Othello.  And  he  bids  his  contemporaries  to  draw  a 
moral  from  the  play,  to  regulate  their  conduct  by  it. 
I  should  hardly  justify  an  appreciation  of  Othello 
on  moral  grounds.  It  is  a  great  psychological 
drama,  and  it  also  touches  the  pinnacle  of  roman- 
ticism. But  a  moral?  Smolenskin  seems  to  have 
found  in  it  a  warning  to  men  to  treat  women  better. 
Certainly  one  would  prefer  that  our  Othellos 
should  be  a  little  milder  towards  their  Desdemonas 
in  real  life. 

All  this  is  off  the  point.  Salkinson's  merit  lay 
just  in  his  power  to  take  a  work  of  art,  pass  it 
through  the  crucible  of  translation,  and  then  bring 
out  the  result  as  a  work  of  art  still.  Translators 
are  not  always  traitors.  I  have  said  nothing  about 
Salkinson's  Romeo  and  Juliet,  because  his  Othello 
came  first.  But  in  the  former  he  reveals  the  same 
qualities.  I  do  not  know  whom  I  would  place  above 
Salkinson  in  the  list  of  the  best  translators  into 
Hebrew. 


310 


"LIFE  THOUGHTS"  OF  MICHAEL 
HENRY 

Michael  Henry  died  in  1875.  In  the  following 
year  a  volume  of  his  Life  Thoughts  was  issued. 
There  are  twenty-one  chapters,  all  of  them  re- 
printed from  the  series  of  "  Sabbath  Readings," 
issued  by  the  Jewish  Association  for  the  Diffusion 
of  Religious  Knowledge.  The  Association,  which, 
I  take  pride  to  remember,  was  founded  by  my 
father,  was  afterwards  transformed  into  the  Jewish 
Religious  Education  Board.  The  Association  took 
a  broader  view  of  its  function  than  does  the  Board; 
at  all  events,  the  discontinuance  of  the  tracts  called 
Sabbath  Readings  was  a  deplorable  but  not  irreme- 
diable error. 

The  Life  Thoughts  of  Michael  Henry  corre- 
sponded to  his  life.  Their  cheery  optimism  was 
part  of  the  man's  self.  Their  philosophy  is  not 
profound,  their  learning  is  not  conspicuous.  But 
they  make  for  happiness.  Michael  Henry  was 
happy  when  he  made  others  happy,  and  he  suc- 
ceeded in  his  genial  ambition.  He  was  only  forty- 
five  when  his  career  ended,  but  he  had  crowded  in 

311 


BY-PATHS  IN  HEBRAIC  BOOKLAND 

that  short  space  many  a  momentous  service, 
especially  to  the  boys  and  girls  whom  he  loved  as 
though  an  elder  brother  to  all  of  them.  It  was  the 
Jewish  boys  and  girls  who  in  1876  presented  the 
first "  Michael  Henry  "  to  the  Royal  National  Life- 
boat Institution.  The  boat  was  twice  replaced  by 
other  "  Michael  Henrys,"  and  the  three  boats 
named  after  "  the  scholars'  friend  "  have  saved 
136  lives.  From  time  to  time  appeals  are  certain 
to  be  made  for  funds  to  enable  further  "  Michael 
Henrys  "  to  be  launched. 

If  to  bring  joy  into  a  life  is  to  save  it,  then  the 
man  Michael  Henry  saved  more  lives  than  all  the 
boats  named,  or  to  be  named,  after  him.  I  have 
already  spoken  of  his  geniality.  A  word  must  be 
added  as  to  his  piety.  Religion  to  him  was  the 
spring  of  conduct.  Here,  again,  his  optimism 
reigned  supreme.  Judaism  was  the  road  to  good, 
on  earth  and  in  heaven.  In  his  Gossip  with  Boys 
he  exclaims :  "  You  may  be  very  good  Jews  and  yet 
very  happy  ones.  Virtue  and  enjoyment  are  not 
incompatible.  It  is  not  unmanly  to  be  good.  Your 
right  arm  will  fling  a  cricket-ball  none  the  less 
deftly  because  your  left  arm  has  worn  the  tephillin 
an  hour  before  you  went  into  the  play-ground. 
Your  heart  will  beat  none  the  less  bravely,  because 

312 


"LIFE  THOUGHTS"  OF  MICHAEL  HENRY 

it  throbs  against  the  four-cornered  band  of  the 
tsitsith."  These  sentences  crystallize  Michael 
Henry's  appeal  to  the  young  for  manliness  and 
confidence. 

Virtue  is  happiness,  duty  is  manliness  — these 
axioms  sum  up  his  creed.  "  The  smile  of  hope  "  he 
perceives  in  the  "  Psalms  of  David."  He  hears 
music,  he  smells  perfume  in  "  Home  worship."  He 
tells  the  "  Barmitzvah  "  that "  by  imitation  of  good, 
great  and  true  men,  the  work  shall  be  done  and  tri- 
umph crown  the  toil."  The  law  and  the  life  which 
"  Moses  "  proclaimed  and  led  are  "  both  glorious 
and  gracious  gifts  of  heaven  to  earth."  "  Happy 
we,"  he  cries  in  his  Elijah,  "  if  when  we  pass  away 
we  leave  behind  us,  like  Elijah,  a  twofold  portion 
of  the  spirit  which  those  whom  we  love  have  every 
reason  to  desire  of  us!  "  From  "  Josiah  "  young 
and  old  may  learn  that  "  the  most  manly  king  of 
Judah  was  also  the  most  religious";  so,  too,  the 
character  of  "  Nehemiah  "  was  a  "  combination  of 
manliness  and  holiness."  "  Moses  Mendelssohn  " 
enables  us  to  learn  to  be  "  good  and  happy,"  and, 
adds  Michael  Henry,  "  it  is  refreshing  to  turn  from 
the  troubled  stories  of  kings,  warriors,  and  states- 
men, to  the  record  of  this  calm,  pure  life,  in  which, 
as  in  the  religion  he  followed,  peace,  love  and  wis- 

313 


BY-PATHS  IN  HEBRAIC  BOOKLAND 

dom  are  harmoniously  combined."  In  his  Message 
of  Love  (Leviticus  19.  18),  he  quotes  with  a  croon 
of  delight  the  poet's  thought  Seid  umschlungen, 
Millionen  ("Millions!  be  locked  in  one  em- 
brace"). 

In  his  paper  on  "  Peace  "  he  enumerates  the 
practical  means  by  which  that  end  may  be  ad- 
vanced, and  he  continues:  "  Thus  we  can  promote 
peace  outwardly  in  the  world,  and  by  that  effort 
pomote  peace  inwardly  in  our  hearts ;  we  can  spread 
around  us  a  peace  of  earth  like  a  sun-picture  of  the 
spiritual  peace  we  ask  from  Heaven  for  our- 
selves." Then,  in  his  paper  on  "  Heaven  upon 
Earth,"  he  argues  that  Judaism  does  not  tell  us 
"  to  strive  against  the  very  nature  of  our  being." 
There  is  a  not  very  thickly  veiled  controversialism 
in  the  sentences  that  follow:  "  We  need  not  turn 
the  left  cheek  when  stricken  on  the  right,  nor  im- 
poverish ourselves  to  enrich  the  poor,  nor  let  the 
guilty  go  free  because  we  are  not  righteous  enough 
to  punish,  nor  leave  the  holy  charms  of  family  de- 
lights to  follow  the  standard  of  fanatical  self- 
denial.  But  what  we  have  to  do  is  this :  True  to 
the  teachings  of  our  faith,  we  have  to  take  our 
nature  as  it  is ;  with  all  its  aims,  its  passions,  its  im- 
pulses ;  and,  beating  the  evil  from  it  as  the  thresher 

314 


"  LIFE  THOUGHTS  "  OF  MICHAEL  HENRY 

strikes  the  chaff  from  the  grain,  or  the  smelter  frees 
the  dross  from  the  gold,  we  must  shape  and  trim 
the  pure  material  into  its  best  form,  and  work  it  to 
its  best  purpose,  drawing  from  it  all  that  it  has  of 
good;  giving  to  all  its  strength  an  upward  ten- 
dency." But  Michael  Henry  is  not  at  his  best  when 
he  is  arguing.  We  enjoy  him  in  his  unreasoning 
but  fascinating  optimism,  as  when,  in  The  Ever- 
lasting Light,  after  describing  the  troubles  and 
clouds  of  life  and  destiny,  he  comfortably  assures 
us:  "  Have  faith,  and  it  all  seems  easy."  We  see 
the  real  Michael  Henry  in  the  three  stories  or 
rather  parables  with  which  the  volume  ends,  "  How 
we  Spoilt  our  Holiday,"  the  "  Schoolboy  and  the 
Angel,"  and  the  "  Everlasting  Rose."  These 
three  chapters  at  least  would  bear  reprinting.  They 
express  Michael  Henry  in  his  most  charming  as- 
pects of  sincerity,  clean-heartedness,  and  uncon- 
querable belief  in  the  ideal. 

But  there  is  one  chapter  missing  from  the  Life 
Thoughts  of  Michael  Henry.  It  is  a  strange  omis- 
sion. No  man  ever  excelled  the  subject  of  this 
article  in  his  power  to  harmonize  his  religion  with 
his  life.  Michael  Henry  as  pietist,  as  lover  of 
children,  as  editor  of  the  Jewish  Chronicle  (from 
1868),  as  agent  for  patents — under  all  these  as- 

315 


BY-PATHS  IN  HEBRAIC  BOOKLAND 

pects  the  man  was  one  and  the  same.  His  Life 
Thoughts  are  a  torso,  unless  we  draw  on  his  writ- 
ings as  a  mechanician.  To  restrict  the  selection  to 
his  contribution  to  the  "  Sabbath  Readings  "  was 
to  misunderstand  him.  And  what  a  notable  chap- 
ter could  have  been  added  from  the  source  indi- 
cated. I  have  read  his  Defence  of  the  Present 
Patent  Law  (1866).  It  is  an  able  plea,  but  though 
it  deals  with  a  severely  commercial  topic  in  a 
business-like  spirit,  the  whole  pamphlet  is  lit  up  by 
the  writer's  spiritual  personality.  Another  fact  re- 
vealed is  this:  It  shows  Michael  Henry  to  have 
been  possessed  of  a  ready  wit,  a  keen  sense  of 
humor.  This  note  is  missing  from  the  volume  of 
Life  Thoughts. 

Even  more  characteristic  is  the  Inventor's  Al- 
manac, the  annual  issue  of  which  was  begun  in 
1858.  To  comprehend  Michael  Henry  it  is  abso- 
lutely necessary  to  turn  over  these  sheets,  a  fine  set 
of  which  (as  continued  also  by  Mr.  Ernest  de  Pass) 
may  be  seen  in  the  British  Museum.  Each 
Almanac  consists  of  a  single  page,  on  which  are 
crowded  masses  of  technical  information — statisti- 
cal, practical,  and  historical.  The  artistic  design  is 
clever.  Now,  the  reason  why  I  am  referring  to 
these  almanacs  is  this:  From  1862  onwards,  the 

316 


"LIFE  THOUGHTS"  OF  MICHAEL  HENRY 

sheets  are  adorned  by  quotations  as  well  as  pictures. 
In  1864  Michael  Henry  quotes  from  Disraeli: 
'  You  have  disenthroned  force,  and  placed  on  her 
high  seat  intelligence."  Then  the  compiler  must 
have  been  struck  by  the  fact  that  Disraeli's  remark 
had  a  scriptural  analogue.  In  1865,  and  in  every 
subsequent  year,  the  Almanac  is  surmounted  by  the 
maxim:  "  Wisdom  is  better  than  strength  "  (Ec- 
clesiastes).  The  reference  is  to  chapter  9  verse 
1 6.  In  1866  he  quotes  Gladstone:  "There  is 
no  honourable,  no  useful  place,  upon  this  busy, 
teeming  earth,  for  the  idle  man."  In  another  issue 
he  uses  a  passage  from  that  once  popular  versifier 
Mackay;  union  had  often  been  tried  by  man  for 
purposes  of  war,  why  not  try  it  for  purposes  of 
peace,  so  that  "  construction,  industry,  and  mutual 
•aid,"  may  "  lead  from  darkness  into  light."  Natur- 
ally enough  he  revels  in  Tennyson : 

Men  our  brothers,  men  the  workers, 
ever  reaping  something  new, 

That  which  they   have   done   but  earnest 
of  the  things  that  they  shall  do. 

He  used  that  couplet  in  1872.     Of  course,  he 
presents  in  due  course  the  same  poet's 

Let  Knowledge  grow  from  more  to  more, 
But  more  of  reverence  in  us  dwell ! 
317 


BY-PATHS  IN  HEBRAIC  BOOKLAND 

Quite  obvious  all  this,  no  doubt.  Michael  Henry 
was,  one  must  admit,  given  to  the  cult  of  the 
obvious.  Therein  lies  not  blame  but  praise.  Many 
of  us  just  fail  because  we  do  not  see  what  lies  sim- 
ply before  us.  Tennyson  was  the  incarnation  of 
obviousness,  hence  he  helped  his  generation  to  see. 
Michael  Henry  had  no  very  keen  or  far  vision. 
But  he  saw  straight,  he  saw  true.  He  was  not  an 
ocean  goer,  he  hugged  the  shore  within  a  dozen 
miles  or  so.  Very  like  a  life-boat,  after  all ! 
Clearly  a  "  Michael  Henry  "  in  good  working  or- 
der will  always  be  the  best  monument  to  his 
memory !  And  he  belongs  to  the  type  which  ought 
to  be  remembered. 


318 


Affixed  to  the  colossal  monument,  which  domi- 
nates and  ennobles  the  entrance  to  New  York  har- 
bor, is,  as  all  the  world  knows,  a  poem  by  Emma 
Lazarus  (1849-1887).  It  commemorates  her  and 
her  genius.  Liberty,  "  a  mighty  woman  with  a 
torch,"  stands  there  as  the  "  Mother  of  Exiles," 
crying  with  silent  lips  to  the  older  world : 

Give  me  your  tired,  your  poor, 
Your  huddled  masses  yearning  to  breathe  free, 

The  wretched  refuse  of  your  teeming  shore, 
Send  these,  the  homeless,  tempest-tost,  to  me, 

I  lift  my  lamp  beside  the  golden  door. 

This  sonnet  expresses  both  sides  of  the  writer's 
idealism:  her  devotion  to  America  and  her  love 
for  the  Jews.  She  wrote  much  as  a  Hellenist,  but 
her  genuine  outbursts  were  stimulated  by  two 
crises :  the  American  War  of  North  and  South  in 
the  sixties,  and  the  Russian  Persecutions  in  the 
eighties.  In  a  sense  it  is  unfortunate  that  the  May 
Laws  came  so  late.  Emma  Lazarus  had  but  few 
years  to  live  after  the  promulgation  of  the  legisla- 
tion which  sent  forth,  from  their  country,  those 

319 


BY-PATHS  IN  HEBRAIC  BOOKLAND 

myriads  of  Russian  Jews,  whose  presence  has  so 
profoundly  altered  Jewish  conditions  in  various 
lands.  Her  Jewish  poems  are  full  indeed  of  fire, 
but  it  is  the  fire  of  an  immature  passion.  When  she 
died,  she  had  only  begun  to  find  herself  as  the 
singer  of  Israel's  cause. 

Even  so,  however,  her  songs  will  not  die.  For 
she  realized  that  Israel  is  "  the  slave  of  the  Idea." 
She  did  not  fully  grasp  what  the  Idea  was,  how- 
ever. Israel's  migrations — including  those  from 
Russia  to  Texas — were  all,  she  felt,  towards  a 
destined  end,  and  that  end — Freedom : 

Freedom  to  love  the  law  that  Moses  brought, 

To  sing  the  songs  of  David,  and  to  think 
The  thoughts  Gabirol  to  Spinoza  taught, 

Freedom  to  dig  the  common  earth,  to  drink 
The  universal  air — for  this  they  sought 

Refuge  o'er  wave  and  continent,  to  link 
Egypt  with  Texas  in  their  mystic  chain, 

And  truth's  perpetual  lamp  forbid  to  wane. 

Freedom  is  part  of  Israel's  Idea ;  it  is  not  the  whole 
of  it. 

In  her  new-found  enthusiasm  for  the  Hebrew 
language  she  translated  much  from  the  medieval 
poets.  But  she  will  always  come  to  one's  mind  as 
the  bard  of  Hanukkah.  There  she  comes  nearest 

320 


EMMA  LAZARUS 


THE  POEMS  OF  EMMA  LAZARUS 

to  the  Idea  of  which  Israel  is  the  missioner. 
Cheyne,  in  one  of  his  finest  works  (  The  Origin  and 
Religious  Contents  of  the  Psalter,  pp.  18,  104), 
quotes  two  stanzas  from  her  Feast  of  Lights  as  an 
apt  commentary  on  Psalms  79  and  1 18,  contrasting 
the  desolation  of  Zion  and  the  re-dedication : 

They  who  had  camped  within  the  mountain-pass, 

Couched  on  the  rock,  and  tented  'neath  the  sky, 
Who  saw  from  Mizpah's  heights  the  tangled  grass 

Choke  the  wide  Temple-courts,  the  altar  lie 
Disfigured  and  polluted — who  had  flung 

Their  faces  on  the  stones,  and  mourned  aloud 
And  rent  their  garments,  wailing  with  one  tongue, 

Crushed  as  a  wind-swept  bed  of  reeds  is  bowed, 

Even  they  by  one  voice  fired,  one  heart  of  flame, 

Though  broken  reeds,  had  risen,  and  were  men, 
They  rushed  upon  the  spoiler  and  o'ercame, 

Each  arm  for  freedom  had  the  strength  of  ten. 
Now  is  their  mourning  into  dancing  turned, 

Their  sackcloth  doffed  for  garments  of  delight, 
Week-long  the  festive  torches  shall  be  burned, 

Music  and  revelry  wed  day  with  night. 

One  could  quote  much  else  from  Emma 
Lazarus;  her  pagan  poems  written  under  classic 
and  romantic  influences;  her  renderings  of  Heine; 
her  historical  tragedy,  the  Dance  of  Death,  dedi- 
cated to  George  Eliot;  her  prose  epistles,  in  one  of 
which  occurs  her  famous  use  of  a  Hebrew  gram- 

21  321 


BY-PATHS  IN  HEBRAIC  BOOKLAND 

matical  form.  In  the  Hebrew  verb  there  is  an 
intensive  voice,  and  so  the  Jews  are  the  intensive 
form  of  any  nationality  whose  language  and  cus- 
toms they  adopt.  Or  again,  one  might  cite  her 
New  Ezeklel,  her  Bar  Kochba,  her  Talmud 
Legends,  her  Rashl  In  Prague,  or,  better  still,  her 
lines  from  Nahum's  Spring  Song: 

Now  the  dreary  winter's  over, 
Fled  with  him  are  grief  and  pain; 
When  the  trees  their  bloom  recover, 
Then  the  soul  is  born  again ! 

But  her  hand  is  always  firmest  when  her  theme  is 
the  Maccabaean  heroism.  This  subject  gave  her 
the  opportunity  which  her  nationalistic  mood 
needed.  We  have  read  part  of  one  of  her  poems 
on  the  subject,  let  us  read  another  in  full,  though  it 
is  perhaps  the  most  familiar  of  her  compositions. 
Its  title  is  "  The  Banner  of  the  Jew."  While  it 
repeats  the  thought  and  almost  the  phrases  of  the 
Feast  of  Lights,  it  has  more  of  the  lyric  lightness 
of  touch.  It  runs  thus : 

Wake,  Israel,  wake!     Recall  to-day 

The  glorious  Maccabean  rage, 
The  sire  heroic,  hoary-gray, 

His  five- fold  lion-.Hneage : 
The  Wise,  the  Elect,  the  Help-of-God, 
The  Burst-of-Spring,  the  Avenging  Rod, 


THE  POEMS  OF  EMMA  LAZARUS 

From  Mizpeh's  mountain-ridge  they  saw 
Jerusalem's  empty  streets,  her  shrine 

Laid  waste  where  Greeks  profaned  the  Law, 
With  idol  and  with  pagan  sign. 

Mourners  in  tattered  black  were  there, 

With  ashes  sprinkled  on  their  hair. 

Then,  from  the  stony  peak  there  rang 
A  blast  to  ope  the  graves:  down  poured 

The  Maccabean  clan,  who  sang 
Their  battle-anthem  to  the  Lord. 

Five  heroes  lead,  and  following,  see 

Ten  thousand  rush  to  victory ! 

Oh  for  Jerusalem's  trumpet  now, 
To  blow  a  blast  of  shattering  power, 

To  wake  the  sleepers  high  and  low, 
And  rouse  them  to  the  urgent  hour! 

No  hand  for  vengeance — but  to  save, 

A  thousand  naked  swords  should  wave. 

O  deem  not  dead  that  martial  fire, 
Say  not  the  mystic  flame  is  spent! 

With  Moses'  law  and  David's  lyre, 
Your  ancient  strength  remains  unbent 

Let  but  an  Ezra  rise  anew, 

To  lift  the  Banner  of  the  Jew! 

A  rag,  a  mock  at  first — erelong 

When  men  have  bled  and  women  wept, 

To  guard  its  precious  folds  from  wrong, 

Even  they  who  shrunk,  even  they  who  slept, 

Shall  leap  to  bless  it,  and  to  save. 

Strike  I  for  the  brave  revere  the  brave ! 
323 


BY-PATHS  IN  HEBRAIC  BOOKLAND 

This  is  bold  and  moving,  but  the  reader  cannot 
fail  to  observe  that  the  metre  and  the  passion  are 
derived  from  Byron's  Isles  of  Greece.  The 
Hebrew's  protest  against  Greece  must,  forsooth, 
owe  its  form  and  sentiment  to  the  Saxon's  plea  for 
Greece !  The  Jewish  muse  is  still  in  leading  strings. 
The  true,  full  song  of  Israel's  hope  is  yet  to  come. 
None  the  less,  the  genius  of  Emma  Lazarus  struck 
truly  the  key-note  to  that  song.  We  hear  its  echo 
still. 


324 


CONDER'S  "  TENT  WORK  IN 
PALESTINE  " 

He  used  the  Bible  too  much  to  please  some  of  the 
continentals.  Compare,  for  instance,  Gautier  with 
Conder.  The  Frenchman  employed  the  Bible  to 
illustrate  the  country,  the  Englishman  the  country 
to  illustrate  the  Bible.  Which  procedure  is  prefer- 
able ?  The  answer  is  another  question.  Why  does 
every  inch  of  Palestine  interest  the  modern  ex- 
plorer? No  Parthenon  is  to  be  seen  within  its 
boundaries,  no  Sphinx.  Neither  is  the  Attic  beauti- 
ful there  to  charm,  nor  the  Egyptian  colossal  to 
provide  a  thrill.  When  Thomson  (in  1859)  called 
his  work  "  The  Land  and  the  Book,"  he  put  the 
seal  on  the  English  way  of  regarding  the  relation 
between  the  geography  and  the  history  of  the  Holy 
Land.  Englishmen  have  been  among  the  keenest 
geographers  of  Palestine  because  they  respond  best 
to  its  history. 

Hence  Conder's  defect,  as  some  have  termed  it, 
is,  in  truth,  his  merit.  Apart,  however,  from  the 
pietism  of  his  motives,  he  deserved  well  of  all  who 
love  Palestine.  He  gave  some  of  his  best  years  to 

325 


BY-PATHS  IN  HEBRAIC  BOOKLAND 

its  survey,  and  that  operation  did  much  to  revivify 
the  country.  His  services  must  always  have  a  value 
because  he,  more  than  any  other  modern,  put  an 
end  to  a  sort  of  thing  formerly  common.  I  mean 
the  sort  of  thing  which  a  pious  old  dame  is  said 
once  to  have  remarked :  "  I  knew  these  places  were 
in  the  Bible,  but  I  did  not  know  they  were  in  Pales- 
tine." Jews  in  particular  owe  a  good  deal  to  him. 
I  doubt  whether  I,  for  one,  would  ever  have  visited 
Medyeh — probably  Modin,  the  home  of  the  Mac- 
cabaeans — but  for  Conder.  I  think  I  could  quote  by 
heart  his  description  how  the  ancient  road  from 
Jerusalem  to  Lydda  emerged  from  the  rocky  Beth- 
horon  defiles  and  "  ran  along  a  mountain  spur 
towards  the  plain  " ;  how,  a  mile  or  so  to  the  north 
of  this  main  road,  the  village  of  Modin  was  built 
upon  the  southern  slopes  of  the  valley;  how  the 
gentle  hills  of  the  lowlands  (Shephelah)  could  be 
seen  from  the  Modin  Knoll,  stretching  westwards. 
"  At  their  feet,  amid  dark  groves  of  olive,  lay  the 
white  town  of  Lydda,  and  behind  it  the  broad  plain 
of  Sharon  extended  to  a  breadth  of  ten  miles. 
Furthest  of  afl,  the  yellow-gleaming  sand-dunes 
bounded  the  rich  arable  land,  and  the  waters  of  the 
Great  Sea  (the  Mediterranean)  shone  brightly  un- 
der the  afternoon  sun." 

326 


CONDER'S  "TENT  WORK  IN  PALESTINE" 

This  description  comes  from  one  of  Conder's 
other    books,    his    Judas   Maccabaeus.      But   his 
earlier  Tent  Work  in  Palestine  (1878)  is  full  of 
passages  just  as  vivid.     It  is  even  more  interesting 
because  it  shows  us  the  explorer  groping  for  the 
results,  at  which  he  has  not  yet  arrived.     Aptly 
enough,  the  title-page  presents,  from  a  sketch  by 
the  author,  a  theodolite-party  at  work,  for  the  sur- 
vey of  Western  Palestine  was  conducted  on  serious 
trigonometrical  methods.    That  the  narrative  is  so 
picturesque  must  not  blind  us  to  the  truth  that  the 
operations  were  severely  scientific.     We  are  now, 
however,  concerned  with  the  pictorial  effects.  Read, 
as  a  parallel  to  the  Modin  description,  Conder's 
account  of  his  first  visit  to  Samaria.     Taking  the 
north  road  from  Jerusalem,  he  passes  the  ranges 
about  Ne"by  Samuel   (probably  the  ancient  Miz- 
pah),    and   sees   the   hills   of   Benjamin,    "black 
against  a  sky  of  most  delicate  blush-rose  tint,  and 
the  contrast  was  perhaps  the  finest  in  a  land  where 
fine  effects  are  common  at  sunset."     Then  he  de- 
scends into  the  rough  gorge  of  the  Robbers'  Foun- 
tain.    "  The  road  is  not  improved  by  the  habit  of 
clearing  the  stones  off  the  surrounding  gardens  into 
the  public  path."    In  the  east,  roads  are  often  thus 
made  the  common  dumping-ground  for  rubbish, 

327 


BY-PATHS  IN  HEBRAIC  BOOKLAND 

and  I  remember  how  the  walk  round  the  outside  of 
the  Jerusalem  walls  was  much  spoilt  by  the  heaps 
of  vegetable  and  other  refuse  which  had  been  flung 
over  the  ramparts.  (General  Allenby's  campaign 
has  already  changed  all  that  for  the  better. )  Pro- 
ceeding, "  the  short  twilight  gave  place  to  almost 
total  darkness  as  we  began  to  climb  the  watershed 
which  separates  the  plain  from  the  valley  coming 
down  from  Shiloh,  and  the  moon  had  risen  when 
the  great  shoulder  of  Gerizim  became  dimly  visible 
some  ten  miles  away,  with  a  silvery  wreath  of  cloud 
on  its  summit."  The  right  time  to  appreciate  Pales- 
tinian scenes  is  usually  just  after  sunset.  And  so, 
on  this  night  march,  Conder  describes  how,  "  creep- 
ing beneath  the  shadow  of  Gerizim,  we  gained  the 
narrow  valley  of  Shechem,  and  followed  a  stony 
lane  between  walnut  trees  under  a  steep  hillside. 
The  barking  of  dogs  was  now  heard,  and  the  lights 
in  camp  came  into  view.  My  poor  terrier  was  tired 
and  sleepy,  and  was  set  upon  at  once  by  Drake's 
larger  bull-terriers,  Jack  and  Jill,  rather  a  rude 
reception  after  a  thirty-mile  journey."  Mr.  C.  F. 
Tyrwhitt  Drake — who  died  soon  afterwards — had 
gone  on  in  advance  and  had  placed  the  camp  close 
to  the  beautiful  fountain  of  Ras  el-Ain. 

828 


CONDER'S  "  TENT  WORK  IN  PALESTINE  " 

Such  extended  journeys  could  not  be  accom- 
plished without  paying  the  price.  Thus,  after  the 
survey  of  Samaria,  Carmel,  and  Sharon,  operations 
had  to  be  suspended  for  a  time,  simply  because  the 
party  had  reached  the  limit  of  endurance.  "  The 
fatigue  of  the  campaign  had  been  very  great.  My 
eyes  were  quite  pink  all  over,  with  the  effects  of  the 
glare  of  white  chalk,  my  clothes  were  in  rags,  my 
boots  had  no  soles.  The  men  were  no  better  off, 
and  the  horses  also  were  all  much  exhausted,  suf- 
fering from  soreback,  due  to  the  grass  diet."  But 
the  spirit  was  stronger  than  the  flesh.  "  The  rest 
soon  restored  our  energies,  and  autumn  found  us 
once  more  impatient  to  be  in  the  fields." 

Thence  Conder  was  off  to  Damascus,  Baalbek 
and  Hermon,  away  from  Palestine  itself.  The 
ascent  of  the  9,000  feet  of  mount  Hermon  was 
begun  at  10.30  a.  m.,  and  at  2  o'clock  the  summit 
was  reached.  But  we  must  pass  over  the  glowing 
description  of  the  panorama  that  unfolded  itself  to 
the  gaze  of  the  explorers.  After  three  months  in 
the  north,  tents  were  struck,  and  the  party  marched 
out  of  their  pleasant  mountain-camp,  bound  for 
Jerusalem  and  the  hills  of  Judah.  Of  the  many 
pen-pictures  which  Conder  draws,  we  will  stay  only 
to  regard  one — the  description  of  Bethar,  where 

829 


BY-PATHS  IN  HEBRAIC  BOOKLAND 

Bar  Cochba  made  his  great  effort  at  recovering 
Jewish  independence  (about  the  year  135  of  the 
present  era).  Conder  locates  the  fortress  at  the 
modern  village  Bittir  (at  which  there  is  now  a  rail- 
way station) .  It  is  about  thirty-five  miles  from  the 
sea,  and  about  five  from  Jerusalem.  "  On  every 
side,  except  the  south,  it  is  surrounded  by  deep  and 
rugged  gorges,  and  it  is  supplied  with  fresh  water 
from  a  spring  above  the  village.  On  the  north 
the  position  would  have  been  impregnable,  as  steep 
cliffs  .  rise  from  the  bottom  of  the  ravine,  upon 
which  the  houses  are  perched.  The  name  (Bittir) 
exactly  represents  the  Hebrew  (Bethar),  and  the 
distances  agree  with  those  noticed  by  Eusebius  and 
the  Talmud.  Nor  must  the  curious  title  be  forgot- 
ten, which  is  applied  to  a  shapeless  mass  of  ruin 
on  the  hill,  immediately  west  of  Bittir,  for  the  name 
Khurbet  el  Yehud — Ruin  of  the  Jews — may  be  well 
thought  to  hand  down  traditionally  among  the  na- 
tives of  the  neighbourhood  the  memory  of  the  great 
catastrophe  of  Bethar."  Whether  this  place  is  the 
true  site  of  Bar  Cochba's  Bethar  may  be  seriously 
questioned,  but  no  other  view  can  claim  to  be  more 
certain.  "  The  site  of  Bethar  must  still  be  con- 
sidered doubtful,"  says  that  good  authority, 
S.  Krauss,  who  himself  is  inclined  to  the  theory 

330 


CONDER'S  "TENT  WORK  IN  PALESTINE" 

which  places  the  fortress  much  further  north,  near 
Sepphoris. 

We  should  like  to  linger  over  the  rest  of  Con- 
der's  journey,  but  the  few  lines  that  remain  must  be 
devoted  to  his  final  remarks.  Conder,  it  must  ever 
be  remembered,  was  one  of  the  first  to  dispute  the 
then  current  belief  that  the  Holy  Land  had  lost  its 
old  character  for  fertility,  and  that  changes  in  cli- 
mate had  induced  an  irreparable  barrenness.  He 
maintained  in  particular  that  the  supposed  dearth 
of  water  had  been  much  exaggerated  by  recent 
tourists.  "  With  respect  to  the  annual  rainfall,  it 
is  only  necessary  to  note  that,  with  the  old  cisterns 
cleaned  and  mended,  and  the  beautiful  tanks  and 
aqueducts  repaired,  the  ordinary  fall  would  be 
quite  sufficient  for  the  wants  of  the  inhabitants  and 
for  irrigation."  (Here,  too,  recent  events  have 
effected  an  agreeable  transformation.)  And,  in 
general  "  the  change  in  productiveness  which  has 
really  occurred  in  Palestine,  is  due  to  decay  of  cul- 
tivation, to  decrease  of  population,  and  to  bad  gov- 
ernment. It  is  Man  and  not  Nature,  who  has  ruined 
the  good  land  in  which  was  '  no  lack,'  and  it  is, 
therefore,  within  the  power  of  human  industry  to 
restore  the  old  country  to  its  old  condition  of  agri- 
cultural prosperity."  Construct  roads,  raise  irriga- 

331 


BY-PATHS  IN  HEBRAIC  BOOKLAND 

tion  works,  promote  afforestation — those  were  the 
measures  Gender  suggested,  after  the  three  strenu- 
ous years  of  his  survey  (1872  to  1875).  Such 
optimistic  opinions  are  now  quite  common;  and, 
we  may  hope,  are  tending  towards  realization,  if 
only  men's  hopes  are  not  set  too  high.  But  let  us 
not  forget  that  among  the  first  moderns  to  formu- 
late such  opinions,  on  the  basis  of  exact  knowledge, 
was  the  author  of  Tent  Work  in  Palestine. 


332 


KALISCH'S   "PATH   AND   GOAL" 

Of  Marcus  Kalisch's  learned  commentaries  on 
the  Bible  it  has  been  truly  said  that  they  are  a 
thorough  summary  of  all  that  had  been  written  on 
the  subject  up  to  the  date  when  those  commentaries 
were  published.  He  not  only  knew  everything,  but 
he  had  assimilated  it.  Nor  was  it  only  his  learning 
that  placed  him  among  the  first  among  the  Jewish 
scholars  of  the  second  part  of  the  nineteenth  cen- 
tury. He  was  original  as  well ;  that  he  "  anticipated 
Wellhausen,"  more  than  one  has  declared  of  him, 
as  they  have  declared  of  others  before  Kalisch. 

Learning  and  originality  make  a  fairly  strong 
instrument  for  drawing  out  the  truth.  But  another 
strand  is  needed  to  compose  the  threefold  cord  that 
shall  not  easily  be  broken.  This,  too,  Kalisch  had 
at  his  command.  It  is  the  strand  of  sentiment.  In 
his  more  orthodox  days  when  he  produced  his 
Exodus  (1855),  and  in  his  more  rationalistic  period 
when  he  gave  to  the  world  his  Balaam  and  his 
Jonah  (1887-8) — at  all  stages  of  his  activity  he 
was  never  the  mere  philologist.  Like  Sheridan's 
character,  he  was  a  man  of  sentiment;  but  unlike 
Joseph  Surface,  his  sentiment  was  genuine.  He 

332 


BY-PATHS  IN  HEBRAIC  BOOKLAND 

was,  to  put  the  same  truth  in  other  words,  an  ex- 
pounder of  ideas  as  well  as  a  critic  of  words. 

It  should  have  surprised  no  one  to  meet  Kalisch 
in  any  situation  where  the  qualities  above  defined 
could  be  exercised.  Yet  some  of  those  who  only 
thought  of  him  as  the  Hebrew  grammarian  must 
have  opened  their  eyes  when  the-  fact  was  brought 
to  their  notice  that  within  a  couple  of  years  of 
printing  his  Genesis  (1858)  he  issued  a  small  vol- 
ume on  Oliver  Goldsmith.  In  1860  he  spoke  the 
substance  of  this  volume  as  "  two  lectures  delivered 
to  a  village  audience."  The  theme  was  treated  by 
him  with  considerable  learning,  but  with  an  even 
more  considerable  good  feeling.  I  remember  par- 
ticularly two  or  three  sentences  in  this  book.  "  For- 
give his  faults,  but  do  not  forget  them  "  is  one — 
I  quote  from  memory  and  may  not  be  verbally 
exact.  Forgiveness  not  only  differs  from  forget- 
fulness,  but,  humanely  considered,  the  two  things 
are  scarcely  consistent.  You  really  can  only  forgive 
when  you  remember — all  that  the  man  was  whom 
you  are  judging.  Another  sentence  that  I  recall  is 
this:  "  You  will  find  Goldsmith's  life  again  in  his 
writings,  and  his  writings  in  his  life."  This  is  a 
notable  conception,  not  original  to  Kalisch.  But 
the  turn  he  gives  to  it  seems  to  me  quite  fresh. 

334 


KALISCH'S  "PATH  AND  GOAL" 

Goldsmith,  he  asserts,  was  a  great  writer  and — 
despite  the  faults  aforementioned — a  good  man. 
'  You  see  his  goodness  in  his  writings  and  his 
greatness  in  his  life  " — a  brilliant  epigram,  but  also 
a  neat  description  of  the  ideal  man  of  letters. 

But  how  came  it  that  Marcus  Kalisch,  a  German 
and  a  Jew,  was  addressing  village  audiences  in 
England  at  all?  Born  in  Pomerania  in  1828,  he 
had  come  to  England  fresh  from  the  Universities 
of  Berlin  and  Halle.  Like  so  many  others  of  vari- 
ous nationalities  and  creeds,  he  had  played  a  gener- 
ous part  in  the  1848  affair,  and  felt  unsafe  after 
its  suppression.  Nathan  Marcus  Adler  had  set- 
tled in  London  in  1845.  The  refugee  found  an 
asylum  with  the  new  chief  rabbi :  Kalisch  served 
the  latter  as  secretary  for  five  years.  His  former 
employer  must  have  felt  fairly  uncomfortable  when 
Kalisch's  Leviticus  appeared  (1867-72),  for  this 
was  a  pretty  thorough  departure  from  the  old- 
fashioned  standpoint.  Kalisch,  of  course,  was  not 
without  honor  in  his  own  community.  He  had  a 
real,  though  not  an  undiscriminating,  admirer  in 
the  late  A.  L.  Green.  We  still,  however,  seem 
rather  far  off  from  solving  the  riddle :  how  came 
Kalisch  to  be  talking  to  English  village  audiences 
on  Oliver  Goldsmith  or  on  any  other  subject?  The 

335 


BY-PATHS  IN  HEBRAIC  BOOKLAND 

answer  is  given  with  the  names  of  the  villages. 
They  were  Aston  Clinton  and  Mentmore  in  the 
county  of  Buckinghamshire — places  long  associated 
with  the  country  homes  of  the  Rothschilds.  In 
1853  Kalisch  was  appointed  tutor  to  the  sons  of 
Baron  Lionel  de  Rothschild.  From  that  date  until 
Kalisch's  death,  in  1885,  there  was  no  break  in  the 
cordial  relations  between  the  Rothschilds  and  the 
scholar.  They  provided  the  leisure,  and  he  pro- 
vided the  capacity  to  make  worthy  use  of  it.  Count- 
less are  the  honorable  incidents  in  the  Rothschild 
record,  but  there  is  none  on  which  a  Jewish  writer 
more  loves  to  dwell  than  on  the  association  of  the 
family  with  the  author  of  Path  and  Goal. 

The  scene  of  that  work  is  Cordova  Lodge,  the 
house  of  Gabriel  de  Mondoza,  situated  in  one  of 
the  northern  suburbs  of  London.  It  was  "  an  un- 
pretending structure  of  moderate  dimensions,  but 
adorned  with  consummate  taste  and  judgment." 
The  further  description  of  the  house  rather  reminds 
one  of  Disraeli's  creations.  And  this  Lodge,  "  a 
veritable  rus  in  urbe,"  with  its  Greek  busts  and 
"  modest  conservatories  " — there  is  not  lacking  even 
"  a  diminutive  farm  " — was,  we  are  told,  so  located 
and  ordered  as  to  afford  "  an  atmosphere  of  calm 
cheerfulness,  inviting  the  mind  at  once  to  concentra- 

336 


KALISCH'S  "PATH  AND  GOAL" 

tion  and  intercommunion."  The  owner,  in  whose 
abode  Kalisch  represents  his  characters  as  gathered, 
was  descended  from  a  distinguished  family  of  Span- 
ish Jews,  who  had  come  from  Holland  to  England 
during  Cromwell's  protectorate.  His  mother  was  a 
German,  "  of  an  essentially  artistic  nature."  From 
his  father  he  derived  his  love  for  the  Bible,  from 
his  mother  his  admiration  for  the  Classics;  and 
doubtful  as  to  which  to  prefer,  "  he  clung  the  more 
firmly  to  both,  and  laboured  to  weld  the  conceptions 
of  the  Scriptures  and  of  Hellenism  into  one  homo- 
geneous design." 

His  house  was  the  habitual  meeting-place  for 
many  native  and  foreign  guests,  and  during  the 
International  Exhibition  a  specially  representative 
group  are  found  at  Cordova  Lodge,  conducting  a 
"  discussion  of  the  elements  of  civilisation  and  the 
conditions  of  happiness."  This  discussion  is  the 
substance  of  the  volume  entitled  Path  and  Goal. 
Such  symposia  go  back  to  Plato,  but  it  was  W.  H. 
Mallock  who,  with  his  New  Republic,  re-popular- 
ized the  genre  in  England.  This  appeared  in  1877; 
Kalisch's  Path  and  Goal  followed  it  in  1880.  The 
disputants  in  the  latter  work  include  Christians  of 
all  degrees  of  high  and  low  Churchiness ;  a  natural- 
ist and  a  Hellenist;  a  Reform  and  an  Orthodox 

aa  337 


BY-PATHS  IN  HEBRAIC  BOOKLAND 

Rabbi ;  a  Parsee  and  a  Mohammedan ;  a  Brahman 
and  a  Buddhist.  Perhaps  the  most  remarkable 
feature  of  this  gathering  is  Kalisch's  recognition  of 
the  importance  of  the  Eastern  religions.  Some- 
times, indeed,  those  who  try  to  prefigure  the  future 
of  the  world's  religion  take  account  of  Islam.  But 
very  few  remember  the  beliefs  and  institutions  of 
India.  The  learning  with  which  Kalisch  discusses 
the  Indian  systems  would  be  amazing  were  one  not 
prepared  for  it  by  previous  knowledge  of  his  ency- 
clopedic acquirements. 

We  will  not  follow  out  into  any  detail  the  course 
of  the  conversations  at  Cordova  Lodge.  It  is 
cleverly  constructed,  being  based  on  a  discussion  of 
Ecclesiastes.  The  whole  of  that  biblical  book  ap- 
pears in  the  second  chapter  of  Path  and  Goal,  and 
it  is  the  text  for  what  follows.  What  is  the  object 
of  the  interchange  of  these  opinions?  "  We  do  not 
search  for  that  which  appertains  to  one  time  or  to 
one  nation,  but  those  truths  which  flow  from  the 
constitution  and  wants  of  human  nature,  and  are 
on  that  account  universal  and  unchanging."  No 
definite  result  is  reached,  except,  perhaps,  the  final 
justification  of  Mondoza's  suggested  "  eucrasy  " — 
the  "  harmony  of  character  which  is  the  perfection 
of  culture."  Here,  then,  we  have  the  very  antith- 

338 


KALISCH'S  "PATH  AND  GOAL" 

csis  to  the  view  expressed  in  Herzberg's  Jewish 
Family  Papers.  Kalisch  believed  in  the  possible 
harmonization  of  various  elements  into  a  perfect 
culture.  But  he  does  not  describe  as  Jewish  the 
resultant  harmony.  He  would  not  have  cared  at 
all  about  the  name;  he  was  chiefly  concerned  with 
the  thing.  And  in  the  light  of  this — for  I  think 
we  may  not  unjustly  attribute  the  host's  sentiments 
to  the  host's  author — he  regarded  the  "  political 
community  as  only  an  elementary  stage  ";  nation- 
ality was  at  best  preparatory  for  the  "  universal 
union  "  of  men ;  while  "  the  feeling  of  nationality 
is  a  onesidedness  to  be  merged  in  a  genuine  and 
ardent  cosmopolitanism."  Cosmopolitanism  is  the 
political  correlative  to  a  belief  in  culture.  In  the 
end  there  is  a  very  general  agreement  among  the 
visitors  at  Cordova  Lodge.  "  Is  this  a  dream?  " 
cries  Mondoza.  "  It  heralds,"  said  Rabbi  Gideon, 
with  a  trembling  voice,  "  the  approach  of  the  time 
predicted  by  our  prophets,  when  '  the  Lord  shall 
be  One  and  His  name  One  ' ;  and  when  '  He  shall 
bless  the  nations  saying,  Blessed  be  Egypt  My  peo- 
ple, and  Assyria  the  work  of  My  hands,  and  Israel 
Mine  inheritance.'  "  (Isaiah  19.  25.)  So,  after  all, 
Kalisch's  "  Goal  "  is  not  widely  distant  from  the 
Goal  that  may  rightly  be  termed  Jewish. 

339 


FRANZ  DELITZSCH'S  "  IRIS  " 

Light  and  color  are  the  themes  of  the  poet.  But 
they  and  the  flowers  attract  the  theologian  also. 
Franz  Delitzsch  produced  his  Studies  in  Color  and 
Talks  on  Flowers  in  1888  (an  English  version  ap- 
pearing in  the  following  year).  The  book  gives 
the  lie  to  the  supposition  that  the  technical  scholar 
is  so  engaged  in  dissecting  things  of  beauty,  that  he 
is  blind  to  the  beauty  of  things.  Delitzsch — the 
student  and  interpreter  of  the  Bible — assures  us 
that  he  could  not  remember  the  time  when  he  did 
not  muse  on  the  language  of  colors;  while,  as  for 
flowers,  they  ever  had  heavenly  things  to  tell  him ; 
in  their  perfume  he  felt  "  the  nearness  and  breath 
of  the  Creator."  Hence  he  called  his  book  Iris. 
"  The  prismatic  colours  of  the  rainbow,  the  bril- 
liant sword-lily,  that  wonderful  part  of  the  eye 
which  gives  it  its  colour,  and  the  messenger  of 
heaven  who  beams  with  joy,  youth,  beauty,  and 
love,  are  all  called  Iris."  A  pretty  notion,  this,  so 
to  name  a  book  which  is  occupied  largely  with  the 
lore  of  Bible  and  Talmud. 

But  the  question  arises:  Did  the  olden  Hebrews 
and  their  rabbinic  descendants  appreciate  colors? 

340 


FRANZ  DELITZSCH'S  "  IRIS  " 

Here  we  are  face  to  face  with  a  basic  error  to  which 
some  investigators  have  succumbed.  They  rely 
too  much  on  words.  The  Hebrew  names  for 
colors  are  vague  and  few.  Does  it,  however,  fol- 
low that  the  ancient  people  were  unable  to  enjoy 
the  blue  of  the  sky  because  they  had  no  word  for 
sky-blue  ?  Men  do  not  name  everything  they  know. 
There  is,  for  instance,  no  specific  Hebrew  for 
volcano,  yet  there  are  a  score  of  passages  in  which 
volcanic  phenomena  are  forcibly  described  in  the 
Old  Testament.  Delitzsch  did  not  belong  to  the 
superficial  theorists  just  cited.  He  points  out  that, 
though  biblical  language  has  no  adjective  for  blue, 
it  compares  the  sky  to  sapphire  in  the  Sinaitic 
theophany  (Exodus  24.  10),  as  well  as  in  Ezekiel's 
vision  of  the  divine  throne.  "  Sapphire-blue  is  the 
blue  of  heaven;  the  colour  of  the  atmosphere  as 
illumined  by  the  sun,  through  which  shine  the  dark 
depths  of  space,  the  colour  of  the  finite  pervaded 
by  the  infinite,  the  colour  taken  by  that  which  is 
most  heavenly  as  it  comes  down  to  the  earthly,  the 
colour  of  the  covenant  between  God  and  man." 
So,  too,  the  Midrash  says  of  the  blue  fringe  worn 
by  Israelites  on  the  corners  of  their  garments — 
a  blue  of  the  purple  hyacinth  hue — that  it  was 
reminiscent  of  the  heavens  and  the  Throne  of 

341 


BY-PATHS  IN  HEBRAIC  BOOKLAND 

Glory.  And  blue,  continues  Delitzsch,  passes  al- 
most universally  as  the  color  of  fidelity.  He  proves 
this  by  reference  to  German  and  Sanskrit.  The 
Indians  would  say  of  a  steadfast  man  that  he  was 
"  as  unchangeable  as  the  indigo  flower,"  which  is 
as  durable  as  it  is  lovely.  "  But  in  biblical  symbol- 
ism there  is  associated  with  blue  the  idea  of  the  blue 
sky,  and  with  the  blue  sky  the  idea  of  the  Godhead 
coming  forth  from  its  mysterious  dwelling  in  the 
unseen  world,  and  graciously  condescending  to  the 
creature."  Delitzsch,  scientific  commentator  though 
he  was,  had  something  of  the  darshan  in  him,  and 
that  accounts  in  part  for  his  charm.  The  spirit  of 
Midrash  rests  where  it  will:  it  is  a  happy  truth 
that  it  sometimes  finds  itself  a  home  in  the  hearts 
of  others  besides  the  sons  of  Israel. 

Delitzsch,  then,  may  be  likened  to  the  darshan: 
he  is  equally  at  home  as  allegorist.  He  can  use  the 
method  of  an  Abbahu ;  he  can  also  follow  the  man- 
ner of  a  Philo.  Take,  for  example,  his  treatment 
of  the  four  colors  which  are  found  in  the  priestly 
vestments — purple-red,  purple-blue,  scarlet,  and 
white.  White,  he  says,  is  the  sacred  color.  Light 
is  white  and  God  is  white.  Dressed  in  the  white 
of  holiness,  the  priests  blessed  Israel  in  the  words : 
"  May  the  Lord  make  His  face  shine  in  light  upon 

342 


FRANZ  DELITZSCH'S  "  IRIS  " 

thee."  Delitzsch  interprets  light  in  the  sense  of 
love.  This  is  not  quite  adequate.  He  often  quotes 
German  university  customs  in  illustration  of  his 
views;  it  is  a  pity  that  he  forgot  the  motto  of  the 
University  of  Oxford,  Dominus  illuminatio  mea 
("  the  Lord  is  my  light  "),  from  the  first  verse  of 
the  twenty-seventh  Psalm.  "  God  is  the  author  of 
knowledge  as  well  as  the  source  of  love,"  comments 
Mr.  C.  G.  Montefiore.  White  would  stand  for 
mind-service  as  well  as  heart-service :  illumination, 
no  doubt,  is  emotional,  but  it  must  also  be  intel- 
lectual to  be  sane  and  complete.  Scarlet,  on  the 
other  hand,  continues  Delitzsch  in  his  allegory  of 
the  priestly  colors,  is  the  contrast  to  white.  Isaiah 
speaks  of  sin  "  red  as  scarlet  " — scarlet  is  the  color 
of  fire,  hence  of  sin  and  the  anger  it  evokes. 
"  Scarlet  with  white  in  the  dress  of  the  high  priest, 
therefore,  means  that  he  is  the  servant  of  that  God 
who  is  holy  not  only  in  His  love,  but  also  in  His 
anger."  A  fine  phrase  that,  showing  deep  insight 
into  the  Hebrew  conception  of  God.  Delitzsch, 
obviously,  is  not  to  be  lumped  together  with  those 
who  would  make  of  God  all  love ;  there  is  a  holy 
anger,  too,  which  belongs  (inseparably  with  the 
love)  to  the  divine  nature.  With  regard  to  the  two 
purples  in  the  priestly  robes,  they  typify  majesty, 

343 


BY-PATHS  IN  HEBRAIC  BOOKLAND 

for  the  dye  was  costly  and  its  effects  magnificent. 
Purple-red  points  to  "  God's  majesty  as  the  exalted 
One,  and  purple-blue  to  God's  majesty  in  His  con- 
descension. "  For,"  continues  Delitzsch,  "  even 
taken  in  itself,  the  impression  produced  by  purple- 
red  is  severe  and  earnest :  whereas  purple-blue  has  a 
soft  tranquillizing  effect.  And  whereas  purple-red 
suggests  the  God  of  judgment  who,  when  He 
frowns  in  anger,  changes  the  heavens  into  black- 
ness and  the  moon  into  blood,  purple-blue  suggests 
the  God  of  peace,  who  overarches  the  earth  with 
the  blue  of  heaven,  like  a  tent  of  peace."  How 
very  fanciful,  but  how  very  Philonean,  and  there- 
fore how  very  Jewish  all  this  is ! 

There  is  much  more  as  good  as  this  in  Iris.  For 
instance,  one  would  hardly  have  looked  for  poetry 
in  the  laws  of  bedikah — the  minute  scrutiny  of  the 
carcasses  of  animals  as  regards  symptoms  of  disease. 
But  just  as  in  Samson's  riddle  out  of  the  body  of 
the  lion  there  came  forth  sweetness,  so  in  Iris  the 
author  extracts  aesthetics  from  the  bedikah  rules, 
and  sees  in  them  evidence  of  the  close  observation 
of  colors  by  the  rabbinic  legalists.  "  The  colour 
of  the  lung  especially  is  subjected  to  the  most  care- 
ful examination.  It  is  reckoned  healthy  if  it  is 
black  like  the  Eastern  eye  paint — that  is,  tending 

844 


FRANZ  DELITZSCH'S  "  IRIS  " 

to  blueish — or  green  like  leek,  or  red,  or  liver- 
coloured,  but  it  is  declared  to  be  unsuitable  for 
eating  if  the  colour  is  as  black  as  ink,  yellowish- 
green  like  hops,  yellow  like  the  yolk  of  an  egg, 
yellow  like  saffron,  yellow-red  like  raw  flesh."  And 
after  the  recital,  Delitzsch  exclaims:  "  Is  not  this 
a  rich  variegated  sampler  of  colours?  " 

Since  the  date  when  Delitzsch  wrote  there  has 
come  about  an  important  change  in  the  opinion  of 
anthropologists.  Little  more  than  a  quarter  of  a 
century  has  passed,  but  all  anthropological  theorists 
no  longer  accept  (though  some  still  do)  one  theory 
on  which  Delitzsch  builds,  namely,  that  primitive 
peoples  were  color-blind.  Several  eminent  authori- 
ties deny  that  savages  lack  the  power  to  discriminate 
colors.  The  fact  simply  is  that  with  advance  in  cul- 
ture there  enters  greater  precision  in  nomenclature; 
color-language  becomes  not  so  much  more  definite, 
as  of  wider  range.  But  why?  Surely  not  because 
of  more  accurate  observation  of  natural  tints.  Cul- 
ture associates  itself  with  town  life,  and  urbans  are 
far  more  color-blind  than  rustics.  At  least,  statis- 
tics are  said  to  prove  this,  though  Dr.  Maurice 
Fishberg  questions  one  of  the  inferences.  The  dis- 
cussion has  importance  owing  to  the  statement  often 
made  that  Jews  are  more  subject  to  color- 

345 


BY-PATHS  IN  HEBRAIC  BOOKLAND 

blindness  than  Gentiles,  the  suggestion  being  that, 
as  Jews  live  predominatingly  in  towns,  they  see 
less  green  than  do  those  who  dwell  in  the  country. 
Dr.  Fishberg,  on  the  other  hand,  maintains  that, 
while  the  poor  and  ill-nourished  are  always  suscepti- 
ble to  color-blindness,  Jews  of  the  well-nourished 
classes  are  quite  as  good  distinguishers  of  shades 
of  color  as  the  rest  of  the  population  of  the  same 
social  status. 

There  remains  something  else  to  add.  Culture 
carries  with  it  luxury,  and  luxury  leads  to  the  manu- 
facture of  silks  and  cloths  of  every  variety  of  shade. 
It  is  the  mediaeval  improvement  in  the  art  of  dye- 
ing that  has  produced  the  increase  of  definition  and 
range  in  the  color  vocabulary.  And  the  art  of 
dyeing  owed  much  to  Jews.  To  repeat  a  well- 
known  fact,  wherever  he  went  on  his  Itinerary  in 
the  mid-twelfth  century,  Benjamin  of  Tudela  al- 
ways found  Jewish  dyers.  Here,  however,  we  must 
break  off,  for  we  seem  getting  a  longish  way  from 
Iris.  But  not  really.  The  book  itself  makes  no 
attempt  to  be  systematic,  and  discursiveness  is,  ac- 
cordingly, not  inappropriate  in  a  causerie  on  Franz 
Delitzsch's  masterpiece. 


346 


1  THE  PRONAOS  "  OF  I.  M.  WISE 

Of  Isaac  Mayer  Wise  it  is  customary  to  speak 
as  an  organizer  and  nothing  more.  True,  the  most 
significant  performance  of  his  long  life  (1819- 
1900)  was  the  foundation  of  institutions  for 
American  Reform  Judaism.  More  than  any  other 
leader  of  his  age  he  realized  two  ideas  which  are 
usually  regarded  as  contradictory,  but  which  Wise 
saw  can  and  must  be  harmonized.  The  two  ideas 
are  not  of  equal  importance.  The  basis  of  a  sound 
Jewish  life  is  the  recognition  of  the  congregation 
as  the  unit.  Wise  perceived  this,  but  he  also 
saw  that  some  sort  of  grouping  of  the  units  is 
necessary  to  convert  the  congregations  into  a  com- 
munity. This  he  effected  by  founding  the  Hebrew 
Union  College  as  representative  of  the  Union  of 
American  Hebrew  Congregations.  The  Union 
devised  by  Wise  differs  essentially  from  the  United 
Synagogue  of  London.  The  latter  depends  on  the 
principle  of  control,  the  former  on  the  principle 
of  co-operation.  This  is  not  the  place  to  discuss 
the  relative  values  of  the  two  principles.  Suffice 
it  to  indicate  the  distinction. 

Yet,  though  Wise  owes  to  his  organizing  skill 
his  fame  as  "  the  most  potent  factor  in  the  history 

347 


BY-PATHS  IN  HEBRAIC  BOOKLAND 

of  Judaism  in  America,"  he  was  also  an  author. 
His  contributions  to  literature  were  many  and 
varied.  He  was,  above  all,  an  energetic  journalist; 
but  he  was  a  novelist  and  a  dramatist  as  well.  A 
careful  study  of  his  writings  on  religion  will  con- 
vince any  unprejudiced  reader  that  Wise  was  also 
a  theologian  of  no  mean  order.  In  his  life-time  it 
was  customary  to  throw  easy  jibes  at  him  as  an 
ignoramus.  But  the  charge  was  false.  Not  long  ago 
I  read  for  the  first  time  Wise's  most  ambitious 
books,  as  well  as  the  Selected  Writings,  edited  in 
1900  by  Drs.  Philipson  and  Grossman.  Now  Wise, 
throughout  his  career,  worked  consciously  with  the 
"  aim  to  reconcile  Judaism  with  the  age  and  its 
needs."  Every  Jewish  leader,  to  whatever  school 
he  belongs,  does  that.  With  Wise,  however,  the 
aim  was  most  consciously  felt.  Hence  his  writings 
were  all  directed  to  current  problems,  to  the  fash- 
ions of  the  hour;  and  as  a  result  his  books  seemed 
ephemeral.  But  the  strange  thing  is  that,  when 
the  fashions  have  passed,  it  is  seen  that  the  treat- 
ment of  them  has  permanent  worth.  I  have  been 
again  and  again  struck  by  Wise's  learning  and 
originality.  He  was  a  pioneer,  for  instance,  in  his 
treatment  of  Christianity.  He  held  the  fantastic 
theory  that  Paul  was  identical  with  Elisha  ben 

348 


ISAAC  MAYER  WISE 


"  THE  PRONAOS  "  OF  I.  M.  WISE 

Abuyah,  and  in  other  points  displays  a  somewhat 
perverse  ingenuity.  But  he  was  a  pioneer  in  trying 
to  separate  the  supernatural  from  the  natural  in  the 
records  of  the  early  church.  "  The  God  Jesus,"  he 
said,  "  and  the  supernatural  Paul  appear  small  in 
the  focus  of  reason.  The  patriotic  and  enthusi- 
astic Jesus,  and  the  brave,  bold,  wise  Paul  are  grand 
types  of  humanity."  The  epithets  applied  by  Wise 
are  not  all  well  chosen;  there  is  frequently  an  eccen- 
tricity in  Wise's  characterizations.  But  the  main 
distinction  which  he  draws  is  sound.  Again,  Wise 
was  a  pioneer  not  so  much  in  laying  stress  on  the 
prophetic  Judaism,  because  Geiger  did  the  same 
before  him ;  but  where  Wise  led  was  in  his  effort  to 
attach  the  prophetic  ideals  to  the  congregational 
life.  He  understood  that  "  social  service  "  ought 
to  be  an  integral  element  in  every  synagogue's  ac- 
tivity. "  Whatever  a  congregation  does,  it  must 
never  neglect  the  first  of  all  its  duties — the  Messi- 
anic duty  of  Israel.  It  must  contribute  its  full  share 
to  the  elevation  of  human  nature,  the  redemption 
of  mankind,  the  sovereignty  of  truth,  and  the 
supremacy  of  reason,  freedom,  and  virtue." 

Wise,  however,  refused  to  set  the  Prophets  above 
the  Law.  The  "  Revelation  on  Mount  Sinai  "  was 
for  him  "  valid  eternally."  It  is  because  of  this 

349 


BY-PATHS  IN  HEBRAIC  BOOKLAND 

aspect  of  his  work  that  I  have  chosen  his  Pronaos 
as  the  peg  on  which  to  hang  these  thoughts.  The 
book  appeared  in  Cincinnati  in  1891,  and  its  full 
title  is  "  Pronaos  to  Holy  Writ  establishing,  on 
documentary  evidence,  the  authorship,  date,  form, 
and  contents  of  each  of  its  books,  and  the  Authen- 
ticity of  the  Pentateuch."  The  book  is  among  the 
earliest  of  the  reasoned  replies  to  the  Higher  Criti- 
cism. Wise  would  have  nothing  to  do  with  the 
modern  treatment  of  the  Pentateuch.  He  had  as 
little  patience  with  Graetz  as  he  had  with  Well- 
hausen.  The  Pentateuch  is  through  and  through 
Mosaic.  Moses  wrote  Genesis  and  Deuteronomy 
with  his  own  hands;  the  rest  was  set  down  soon 
after  his  death  from  the  records  which  he  had  left 
for  the  purpose.  And  further:  "  There  exists  no 
solid  ground  on  which  to  base  any  doubt  in  the 
authenticity  of  any  book  of  Holy  Writ."  With 
that  emphatic  assertion  the  book  ends. 

Wise,  'it  must  be  confessed,  seemed  unaware  of 
the  constructive  side  of  criticism.  To  him  criticism 
seemed  entirely  negative.  Again,  he  was  unable  to 
see  that  the  value  of  the  Bible  may  continue,  even 
though  the  older  conception  of  authenticity  be  modi- 
fied. But  the  interest  of  his  Pronaos  just  lies  in  the 
vigor  with  which  he  maintains  that  older  conception. 

350 


"  THE  PRONAOS  "  OF  I.  M.  WISE 

His  defence  is  spirited,  and  in  many  ways  convinc- 
ing. Criticism  was  undoubtedly  wrong  when  it 
treated  Judaism  as  the  creation  of  the  prophets, 
and  the  Pentateuch  as  lower  in  worth  than  Micah 
and  Isaiah.  I  do  not  remember  that  any  predeces- 
sor of  Wise  so  thoroughly  employed  the  argument 
of  continuity.  There  is,  he  said,  an  "  uninter- 
rupted tradition,"  the  whole  is  "  a  logical  organ- 
ism," every  part  in  its  right  place,  fulfilling  its  due 
function.  Now  this  is  the  real  justification  of  the 
Bible.  There  are  variations  in  the  points  of  view 
of  various  inspired  writers,  but  the  whole  tendency 
is  one,  there  is  consistency  of  purpose.  Wise  de- 
serves lasting  gratitude  for  urging  this  truth  so 
powerfully.  Well  might  he  term  his  book  a 
Pronaos,  a  "  door  leading  into  the  interior  of  the 
sanctuary."  For  a  detail,  it  is  significant  to  find 
that  Wise  anticipated  the  newer,  though  I  think 
erratic,  direction  of  criticism  in  our  day.  He  abso- 
lutely refused  to  admit  that  the  different  names 
applied  to  God  (Adonai  and  Elohim)  point  to  dif- 
ferent authors  or  ages. 

Differ  though  we  may  with  Wise — some  of  us 
on  account  of  his  rejection  of  criticism,  others  be- 
cause of  his  elevation  of  "  Mosaism  "  into  a  cult, 
others  again  because  of  both  of  these  things — it  is 

351 


BY-PATHS  IN  HEBRAIC  BOOKLAND 

not  possible  to  withhold  from  him  the  crown  of 
scholarship.  In  particular,  his  Pronaos  abounds 
in  acute  and  fresh  contributions  to  the  biblical 
problem.  It  is,  moreover,  a  striking  instance  of  the 
ironies  of  controversy  that  the  most  orthodox  book 
on  the  Pentateuch  was  written  by  the  leader  of 
American  reform  !  Cincinnati,  under  the  influence 
of  Wise,  was  certainly  much  more  conservative  in 
biblical  exegesis  than  Breslau  was  under  the  influ- 
ence of  Graetz.  If  in  the  seventies  and  eighties 
a  student  had  desired  to  work  in  an  environment 
which  acknowledged  the  older  views  of  biblical  in- 
spiration, he  would  have  found  himself  more  at 
home  in  the  Hebrew  Union  College  than  in  the 
Frankel  Seminary.  In  the  course  of  this  series  of 
papers,  several  anomalies  have  been  discussed. 
But  none  of  them  is  more  remarkable  than  the 
contrast  between  Wise  and  Graetz.  There  is  an- 
other side  to  it,  of  course.  Graetz  took  a  wider 
view  of  tradition  than  did  Wise,  who  never  truly 
grasped  the  meaning  of  tradition.  Yet  the  fact 
remains  that  in  so  far  as  the  question  of  a  tradition 
concerns  the  Bible,  Wise  stood  far  more  firmly  in 
the  old  paths  than  did  many  who  pass  for  cham- 
pions of  tradition. 


352 


A  BAEDEKER  LITANY 

In  the  Baedeker  Handbook  for  Palestine  and 
Syria  there  is  a  well-known  description  of  the  scene 
at  the  western  wall  of  the  temple.  In  A.  and  C. 
Black's  Guide  to  Jerusalem,  the  Wailing  Place  is 
included  among  "  Minor  Sights,"  but  Baedeker 
stars  it,  thus  giving  it  a  testimonial  of  importance. 
Not  being  an  inn,  the  wall  could  spare  this  mark. 
I  remember  reading  a  clever  story  called  "  The 
Lost  Star."  A  visitor  to  a  hotel  was  dissatisfied 
with  his  treatment,  and  his  complaints  to  the  man- 
ager were  impatiently  received.  When  the  guest 
departed,  he  simply  said :  "  I  am  Baedeker.  You 
have  lost  your  star."  The  Wailing  Place  could  do 
without  Baedeker's  patronage. 

Now,  it  is  not  my  purpose  to  discuss  the  history 
of  praying  at  the  temple  wall.  Jerome,  in  the 
fourth  century,  speaks  pathetically  of  the  Jews 
"  buying  their  tears,"  paying  for  the  privilege  of 
weeping  by  the  wall  on  the  anniversary  of  the  tem- 
ple's destruction.  But  what  will  concern  us  now  is 
Baedeker's  account  of  the  liturgy  used  at  the  pray- 
ers. The  Rev.  W.  T.  Gidney  (as  quoted  in  Black) 
23  353 


BY-PATHS  IN  HEBRAIC  BOOKLAND 

asserts  that  there  is  used  "  a  kind  of  liturgy,"  the 
concluding  part  of  which  is: 

Lord,  build ;  Lord  build — 

Build  Thy  house  speedily. 
In  haste !  in  haste !  even  in  our  days. 

Build  Thy  house  speedily. 
In  haste!  in  haste!  even  in  our  days, 

Build  Thy  house   speedily. 

I  do  not  know  whether  any  Jews  actually  sing  this 
Passover  hymn  (Addir  hu)  on  other  occasions  dur- 
ing the  year.  Murray's  Palestine  Handbook  as- 
serts that  "  the  lamentations  are  taken  from  the 
79th  Psalm,"  a  statement  which  points  to  the  same 
source  as  that  relied  on  by  Baedeker.  The  latter 
gives  two  forms,  of  which  the  first  runs  thus : 

Leader:   For  the  palace  that  lies  desolate: 

Response:    We  sit  in  solitude  and  mourn. 

Leader:   For  the  palace  that  is  destroyed: 

Response:    We  sit,  etc. 

Leader:   For  the  walls  that  are  overthrown: 

Response:    We  sit,  etc. 

Leader:    For  our  majesty  that  is  departed: 

Response:    We  sit,  etc. 

Leader:    For  our  great  men  who  lie  dead: 
Response:    We  sit,  etc. 

Leader:    For  the  precious  stones  that  are  burned: 
Response:    We  sit,  etc. 

354 


Leader:    For  the  priests  who  have  stumbled: 
Response:    We  sit,  etc. 

Leader:    For  our  kings  who  have  despised  Him: 
Response:    We  sit,  etc. 

Whence  did  the  compiler  of  Baedeker  derive 
this?  From  the  Karaites.  If  one  turns  to  the 
fourth  volume  of  the  Karaite  liturgy,  published  in 
Vienna  in  1854,  page  208,  this  litany  is  to  be  found. 
It  is  part  of  a  very  long  series  of  prayers  (which 
include,  on  page  212,  the  passage  which,  in  Baede- 
ker, follows  the  one  cited  above).  Psalm  79,  re- 
ferred to  in  Murray,  appears  in  the  same  Karaite 
book  on  page  206.  The  selections  are  a  tiny  frac- 
tion of  the  whole.  The  Karaite  prayers  are  always 
extremely  long.  Thus,  their  marriage  service  fills 
eleven  large,  closely  printed  sides.  The  Jerusalem 
prayers  are  even  more  elaborate.  As  the  pilgrim 
starts  from  home  for  the  Holy  City,  the  congrega- 
tion turns  out  to  give  him  a  send  off,  reciting  six- 
teen  Psalms  as  a  supplication  for  his  protection,  and 
other  fourteen  Psalms  in  praise  of  Jerusalem.  He 
then  proceeds  on  his  way.  When  he  arrives  at  the 
city,  as  far  off  as  the  distance  at  which  a  man  can 
recognize  his  fellow,  he  rends  his  garments  and 
mourns  as  for  a  lost  first-born.  He  then  recites 
parts  of  the  Lamentations,  and  enough  Psalms  and 

355 


BY-PATHS  IN  HEBRAIC  BOOKLAND 

Selihot  to  occupy  another  ten  pages.  Some  of  us 
complain  of  the  length  of  our  prayers;  when  we 
look  at  the  weary  mass  of  the  Karaite  liturgy,  we 
stand  amazed  at  our  own  moderation. 

Having  tracked  Baedeker  to  his  source,  and  re- 
stricting ourselves  to  the  pages  from  which  he 
quotes,  it  is  worth  comparing  his  version  with  the 
original.  The  omissions  made  are  so  serious  as  to 
spoil  the  beauty  of  the  whole,  for  beautiful  it  as- 
suredly is  of  its  kind.  The  fault  arises  from 
Baedeker  only  reading  down  one  of  the  two  col- 
umns. Now  the  lines  are  alphabetical,  and  must  be 
read  across,  not  down  the  page.  There  are  other 
faults;  for  instance  palace  in  the  second  line  is  a 
mistake  for  house,  but  the  compiler  may  have  used 
a  slightly  different  version.  In  the  one  before  me 
there  is  nothing  to  correspond  to  For  our  great  men 
who  lie  dead.  The  rest  of  the  lines  are  the  same 
as  in  the  book  I  am  using.  But  note  how  the  effect 
suffers  by  the  loss  of  the  half-lines  to  which  I  have 
referred.  Thus  Baedeker  gives  For  the  priests  who 
have  stumbled,  but  omits  the  complementary  phrase 
For  our  studies  which  were  interrupted.  Again, 
Baedeker  quotes  For  the  precious  stones  which  are 
burned,  but  fails  to  follow  it  up  with  For  loving 
ones  that  were  separated,  a  fine  line  which  ought  to 

356 


A  BAEDEKER  LITANY 

have  been  retained  in  any  abbreviation,  however 
short. 

The  only  other  passage  quoted  in  Baedeker, 
"  another  antiphon  "  or  responsive  chant,  is  the 
following: 

Leader:    We  pray  Thee,  have  mercy  on  Zion ! 
Response:    Gather  the  children  of  Jerusalem. 

Leader:    Haste,  haste,  Redeemer  of  Zion! 
Response:    Speak  to  the  heart  of  Jerusalem. 

Leader:    May  beauty  and  majesty  surround  Zion ! 
Response:    Ah!  turn  Thyself  mercifully  to  Jerusalem. 

Leader:    May  the  kingdom  soon  return  to  Zion ! 
Response:    Comfort  those  who  mourn  over  Jerusalem. 

Leader:    May  peace  and  joy  abide  with  Zion! 

Response:    And  the  branch   (of  Jesse)   spring  up  in  Jerusalem. 

Comparing  this  with  the  Hebrew  original,  there 
is  no  such  mistake  as  in  the  previous  case.  The 
summarizer  has  correctly  read  the  lines  across  the 
page.  There  are  certain  slips,  and  more  than  a 
half  of  the  whole  (which  again  runs  in  alphabetical 
sequence)  is  left  out;  but  the  shortening  is  here  no 
loss,  as  the  best  lines  have  been  selected. 

Besides  these  prayers,  the  Karaite  book  includes 
a  large  number  of  hymns.  Among  them,  inappro- 
priately enough,  is  the  piyyut  on  the  offering  of 
Isaac.  In  the  Sephardic  service  this  properly  be- 

357 


BY-PATHS  IN  HEBRAIC  BOOKLAND 

longs  to  the  New  Year;  it  goes  to  a  swinging 
melody  at  Bevis  Marks.  True,  the  scene  was 
Moriah,  the  temple  hill.  But  the  Karaite  book 
gives  no  direction  that  the  shofar  is  to  be  sounded. 
None  the  less,  it  finishes  this  piyyut  with  the  prayer 
that  God  will  hearken  to  the  shofar  sounds  and  say 
unto  Zion:  "The  time  of  salvation  has  come." 
Obviously,  this  is  a  fitting  prelude  to  the  blowing 
of  the  shofar  on  Rosh  ha-Shanah.  But  it  has  no 
right  where  this  Karaite  book  has  transplanted  it, 
although  the  bulk  of  the  hymn  suits  well  enough 
the  liturgy  of  the  Wailing  Place. 


358 


IMBER'S  SONG 

Throughout  its  whole  range  modern  Hebrew 
literature  can  offer  no  poem  to  rival  in  popularity 
Imber's  song.  Naphtali  Herz  Imber  was  born  in 
1856,  and  wrote  Ha-Tikwah  in  his  youth  in  one  of 
his  many  moods.  His  disposition  was  wayward; 
he  had  a  full  share  of  the  artistic  self-consciousness. 
Some  of  his  characteristics  are  accurately  hit  off  in 
Melchitsedek  Pinchas  of  Mr.  Zangwill's  Children 
of  the  Ghetto. 

Ha-Tikwah  owes  its  fame  to  the  directness  of  its 
sentiment.  What  makes  for  weakness  in  it  as  a 
poem  makes  for  strength  in  it  as  a  song.  The  most 
effective  national  hymns  are  not  usually  the  most 
poetical.  "God  save  the  King"  is  doggerel; 
"  Rule  Britannia  "  is  bombast.  But  both  put  patri- 
otic thoughts  in  straightforward  terms,  both  are 
happily  wedded  to  simple  tunes  within  the  range  of 
average  voices.  Ha-Tikwah  satisfies  both  these 
tests.  The  melody  is  beautiful  and  easily  sung  by 
large  masses  of  people.  The  opening  line  of 
Imber's  refrain:  "  Our  hope  has  not  perished  yet  " 
is  certainly  derived  from  the  National  Song, 
"  Poland  has  not  perished  yet,"  to  which  the  Polish 
legions  marched.  So  the  melody  of  Ha-Tikwah  is 

359 


BY-PATHS  IN  HEBRAIC  BOOKLAND 

said  to  be  a  Polish  folk-tune,  but  it  closely  resem- 
bles a  favorite  melody  of  the  Sephardim.  Various 
settings  of  the  tune  differ  in  detail,  and  the  same  is 
true  of  the  current  versions  of  Imber's  words.  It 
is  strange  that  the  versions — all  known  to  me — 
retain  unanimously  the  ungrammatical  second 
stanza.  It  would,  I  admit,  be  difficult  to  correct  it 
without  destroying  the  rhythm,  and  poetical  license 
has  worse  things  to  answer  for.  Indeed  the  gram- 
matical lapse,  to  which  I  refer,  is  regarded  by  some 
authorities  as  perfectly  normal  and  admissible  in 
the  new  Hebrew. 

The  power  of  Ha-Tikwah,  as  has  just  been  said, 
arises  from  its  directness.  There  is  no  subtlety  in 
its  thought,  no  changes  through  its  nine  verses. 
Just  as  few  ever  sing  through  "  God  Save  the 
King,"  so  few  sing  all  the  verses  of  Ha-Tikwah. 
The  stanzas  tend  to  become  monotonous.  They 
all  say  the  same  thing;  and  it  is  not  surprising  that 
the  number  of  verses  is  curtailed  in  some  printed 
editions  (thus  in  Idelsohn  five  of  the  nine  verses 
complete  the  song).  The  burden  of  all  the  verses 
is  identical.  The  hope  of  a  return  to  the  land  of 
Israel  will  never  die,  so  long  as  this  or  that  endures. 
Each  verse  adds  a  this  or  a  that  to  the  count.  While 
myriads  of  Jews  go  as  pilgrims  to  the  sepulchres  of 

360 


NAPHTALI  HERZ  IMBER 


IMBER'S  SONG 

the  fathers,  while  a  single  eye  is  left  to  drop  its 
tear  over  the  ruins  of  the  temple,  while  the  waters 
of  the  Jordan  swell  between  its  banks  and  fall  with 
a  rush  through  the  sea  of  Kinnereth,  while  a  drop 
of  blood  courses  through  a  Jewish  vein,  while  Israel 
retains  his  national  aspirations,  still  may  he  hope 
for  their  fulfilment.  Some  of  these  appeals  are 
genuinely  pathetic,  and  the  final  appeal  is  magnifi- 
cent in  its  strength.  Only  with  the  end  of  the  Jews 
will  come  the  end  of  the  hope.  This  is  the  only 
way  to  write  a  popular  song.  There  must  be  no 
nuances,  but  just  a  confident  assertion.  Imber  sup- 
plies exactly  that;  nothing  less,  and  nothing  more. 
Nothing  more,  for  the  song  is  not  in  any  sense  a 
declaration  of  the  end.  It  deals  only  with  the 
means,  making  them  into  an  end.  Unquenchable, 
he  cries,  is  the  hope  of  a  return;  no  one  has  ex- 
pressed this  hope  more  vigorously  and  takingly. 
But  what  is  to  be  the  result  of  the  return  ?  With 
what  ideals  are  the  patriots  filled?  Ha-Tikwah 
is  silent  on  these  questions.  Imber  was  not  quali- 
fied to  reply  to  them.  He  had  no  depth  of  spiritual 
feeling,  and  though  he  was  capable  of  inspiriting, 
he  was  incapable  of  inspiring.  Hence  the  absence 
of  all  Messianic  thought  in  Ha-Tikwah.  Com- 
pare it,  for  instance,  with  Leka  Dodi;  the  Friday 
24  361 


BY-PATHS  IN  HEBRAIC  BOOKLAND 

night  hymn  is  like  Ha-Tikwah,  a  song  of  the  re- 
turn, but,  unlike  Ha-Tikwah,  it  is  Messianic,  and  is 
also  a  song  of  the  rebuilding.  When  the  history 
of  the  neo-Zionist  movement  comes  to  be  written, 
this  fact  will  undoubtedly  come  into  due  promi- 
nence :  namely,  that  we  have  been  passing  through 
a  phase  in  which  the  hope  of  the  return  has  been 
divorced  from  the  hope  of  the  rebuilding. 

It  is  remarkable  that  some  versions  of  the  re- 
frain remove  the  only  words  which  possibly  can 
bear  a  Messianic  construction.  I  have  not  before 
me  the  original  words  of  Imber  himself,  and  I  have 
a  notion  that  Mr.  David  Yellin  is  responsible  in 
part  for  the  chorus.  Be  that  as  it  may,  in  the  last 
line  Jerusalem  is  described  as  "  the  city  where 
David  encamped."  The  phrase  comes  from  the 
opening  line  of  the  twenty-ninth  chapter  of  Isaiah. 
"  Woe  to  Ariel,  Ariel,  city  where  David  en- 
camped " — Ariel  is  either  "  Lion  of  God  "  or,  as 
the  Targum  takes  it,  "  Altar-hearth."  The  Rabbis 
combined  both  senses.  Ariel  was  the  altar,  yet 
they  saw  something  lion-shaped  in  the  sanctuary. 
In  Isaiah  the  passage  is  one  of  doom,  Ariel  is  to  be 
humiliated  by  the  Assyrians.  Curiously  enough, 
the  ancient  Greek  translation  gives  also  a  hostile 
turn  to  the  words  "  city  where  David  encamped," 

362 


IMBER'S  SONG 

rendering  "  against  which  David  encamped."  But 
this  is  erroneous.  The  meaning  is:  the  city  in 
which  David  dwelt,  selecting  it  as  the  royal  capital. 
David,  it  is  true,  did  not  build  the  temple,  but  he 
brought  the  ark  thither,  and  offered  sacrifices  on 
the  occasion,  and  later  on  built  an  altar.  Not  only, 
then,  is  Ariel  justly  to  be  termed  the  city  where 
David  encamped,  but  the  use  of  the  phrase  in 
Ha-Tikwah  supplies  the  missing  Messianic  hope, 
for  David  is  the  type  of  this  hope.  In  the  version 
of  Ha-Tikwah  printed  by  Idelsohn  four  verses  are 
omitted,  and  some  of  those  which  are  retained  are 
set  in  an  inverted  order.  More  culpably,  the  re- 
frain is  weakened  into  "  the  city  of  Zion  and  Jerusa- 
lem," thus  removing  the  Davidic  touch.  The 
change  does  not  merely  offend  against  reason;  it 
also  sins  against  rhyme;  thus  adding  another  in- 
stance to  many  others  of  the  destructive  tamperings 
with  masterpieces  which  some  editors  seem  unable 
to  avoid. 

One  other  striking  merit  of  Ha-Tikwah  must  be 
observed.  Unlike  many  other  poets  of  Zion,  Imber 
does  not  denounce.  He  makes  no  attack  on  those 
who  do  not  share  his  feelings.  He  points  to  the 
continued  existence  of  the  hope  for  the  return,  but 
he  refrains  from  condemning,  except  by  the  merest 

363 


BY-PATHS  IN  HEBRAIC  BOOKLAND 

implication,  those  who  have  no  consciousness  of  the 
hope.  There  is  true  art  here,  which  I  am  able  to 
appreciate,  far  removed  as  I  am  from  Imber's  na- 
tionalism. For,  on  the  one  hand,  art  is  best  when  it 
pleases  some  without  paining  others.  Imber  pleases 
those  who  agree  with  him  without  paining  the 
rest.  On  the  other  hand,  art  is  strongest  when 
it  does  not  recognize  that  there  are  others  to  be 
displeased.  The  confident  note  is  the  artistic  note. 
The  poet  assumes  that  what  he  feels  is  the  only 
thing  to  feel.  To  talk  of  doubters  is  to  throw 
doubt  on  himself.  A  popular  song  cannot  stoop  to 
argument.  It  is  categorical.  Thus  Imber's 
Ha-Tikwah  can  be  enjoyed  by  those  who  do  not 
accept  its  message.  And  its  melody  is  sung  at 
table,  to  Psalm  126,  by  some  who  never  sing  the 
tune  to  Imber's  words.  "  When  the  Lord  turned 
again  the  captivity  of  Zion,  we  were  like  unto  them 
that  dream.  Then  was  our  mouth  filled  with 
laughter,  and  our  tongue  with  exultation;  then  said 
they  among  the  nations:  The  Lord  hath  done 
great  things  for  them."  Psalm  126,  when  all  is 
said  and  done,  is  the  most  exquisite  Song  of  the 
Return  ever  written.  "  They  that  sow  in  tears 
shall  reap  in  joy."  We  can  all  realize  the  pathos 
and  the  hope,  even  though  we  are  not  at  one  as  to 
the  nature  of  the  harvest  that  is  to  be  reaped. 

364 


INDEX 


Abarbanel,    53. 

Aben  Ezra,  176;  see  also  Abra- 
ham Ibn  Ezra. 

Aboab,  Isaac,   102-107. 

Abraham  Ibn  Ezra,  66,  261,  269; 
see  also  Aben  Ezra. 

Acosta,    Uriel,    240-246. 

Addison,  Joseph,  153,  236,  237. 

Addison,    Lancelot,    153-159. 

Adler,  H.,  288. 

Adler,    Michael,    228,   270. 

Adler,  Nathan  M.,  288,  335. 

.flisop's  Fables,    18,  22,  35,  84. 

Aguilar,  Grace,  247-253. 

Ahad   ha-'Am,    185,    289. 

Ahikar,   the   story   of,    17-23. 

Al-Fasi,   63. 

Alfieri  and  Salomon,  by  Landor, 
260-266. 

Al-Harizi,    79,   8r. 

Allenby,  General,  328. 

Allingham,   William,  82. 

Alnaqua,   Israel,    102,    103. 

Anti-Maimonists,    85. 

Apion,  Josephus  against,  32-38. 

Arabian   Nights,    18. 

Archagathos,   43,  44. 

Aristeas,  Letter  of,  116,  117,  119, 
120. 

Aristobulus,    Jewish  Hellenist,  44. 

Aristotle,  78,  79. 

Arnold,    Edwin,   233. 

Arnold,  Matthew,  32,  42,  207. 

Artom's  Sermons,  297-302. 

Aruk,  the,  by  Nathan  of  Rome, 
60-66. 

Ass-worship,  libel  of,  34. 

Auerbach,   Berthold,   242. 


Baedeker's,    Handbook    for    Pales- 
tine,  353-358. 
Bandmann,  A.,  240. 
Bar  Abun,  Solomon,  97-101. 
Bar  Hisdai's  Prince  and  Dervish, 

84-90. 

Baratier,  270. 
Barb,   Isaac,   304. 
Barbary    Jews,    Lancelot    Addison 

on  the,   153-159. 
Barlaam    and    Josaphat,    romance 

of,  88,  89. 
Belinson,  291. 
Benevolent  Jew,  the,  by  George 

Walker,   192-198. 
Ben     Ezra,     Rabbi,     by      Robert 

Browning,    269-275. 
Ben  Karshook,  by  Browning,   269- 

275- 

Benisch,  A.,  254,  255,  256. 
Benjamin  of  Tudela,   270. 
Bernstein,  282. 
Berdoe,  271. 

Black's    Guide  to   Jerusalem,   353. 
Blanco  .  White's    Sonnet,    220-225; 

see  also  White,  Joseph  Blanco. 
Bodenschatz     Pictures,     the,     160- 

165. 

Bonajuto,   116;  see  also  De  Rossi. 
Book  of  Tobit,   17,   18,   22,  23. 
Bornstein,   H.   J.,  304. 
Box,  C.  H.,   136. 
Braham,   208,   209. 
Briggs,  C.  A.,  225. 
Brooke,  Stopford,  274. 
Browning,     Robert,     265,     269-275. 
Buddha,  life  of,  88. 
Buffon,    French   naturalist,   32. 


365 


INDEX 


Burke,  Edmund,  168. 
Burne-Jones,   95,  96. 
Buxtorf,  J.,  62. 
Byron,    199,   324. 

Byron's    Hebrew     Melodies,     194, 
207-213,  265. 

Caecilius  on  the  Sublime,  39-45. 

Caine,   Hall,   240. 

Carigal,    rabbi,    176. 

Cassel,  Paul,   no. 

Cervantes,   109. 

Cheyne,  T.  K.,   321. 

Chilmead,  Edmund,   138,   139,   140, 

141. 

Chwolson,   Daniel,    no. 
Cicero,  33. 

Cobbett,  William,  200. 
Cohen,  F.  L.f  101,  208. 
Cohn,  26. 

Coleridge,    S.    T.,    214-219,    224. 
Coleridge's    Table    Talk,    214-219. 
Conder,  325-332. 
Conybeare,  F.  C.,  25,  26. 
Cowley,  A.  E.,  80. 
Crawford  Haggadah,  the,  92,  96. 
Creighton,  bishop,  113. 
Crump,  C.  G.,  260. 
Cromwell,    Oliver,    138,    139,    147, 

337- 
Cumberland,     Richard,     191,    193, 

201,    275. 

Da   Costa,   H.    Men.,    174, 

Dahl,  Basil,  304. 

Dalman,   G.,  62. 

Dante,  263. 

De  Rossi,  Azariah,   116-121. 

De    Rossi's    Light    of    the    Eyes, 

116-121. 

De  Sola,  79,  80. 

Degli  Mansi,  Italian  Jewish  family, 
60,  1 1 8. 


Deity,  depicting  of  the,  92,  93,  152. 

Delitzsch,  Franz,  340-346. 

Demosthenes,  33. 

Deutsch,   Emanuel,    190. 

Dickens,  Charles,  227. 

Didot,  M.,  151. 

Disraeli,    Benjamin,    226-232,    336. 

Disraeli's   Alroy,   226-232. 

Disraeli,  Isaac,  229. 

Dobson,  Austin,   123. 

Dore,  biblical  pictures  of,  254. 

Drake,  C.  F.  Tyrwhitt,  328. 

Dutuit,  M.,  151. 

Efros,    Israel,   102. 
Eichler,  German  artist,  161. 
Eisenmenger,  189,  288. 
Eliezer,  son  of  Hyrkanos,  273. 
Eliot,    George,   229,  321. 
Elisha   ben   Abuyah,   244,   348. 
'  En    Ya'akob,    102-107. 
Ephrathi,   Joseph,   265. 
Epictetus,   32. 
Espinasse,  Francis,   153. 
Erasmus,    no,    113. 
Essenes,  the,  20. 
Eusebius,    48,    330. 
Ezekielos,   Jewish   Greek  poet,   46- 
52. 

Faithful  Shepherdess,  by  Fletcher, 

127. 
Family  Papers,  by  Wilhelm  Herz- 

berg,  283-289. 
Fettmilch   riot,   130. 
Finzi,   David,    118. 
Fishberg,  Maurice,  345,  346. 
Fletcher's     Faithful     Shepherdess, 

127-  i 

Frankel,  Z.,  288,  352. 
Frankfurt,  Moses,   103. 
Franzos,   Karl    Emil,   276-282. 
Friederich  of   Brandenburg,    160. 
Furnivall,  269. 


366 


INDEX 


Gaffarel,  J.,    136. 

Caster,   Moses,    172. 

Gautier,    325. 

Geiger,    Abraham,    349. 

Geiger,   L.,   72. 

Gellius,  Aulus,  33. 

Gibbon,   E.,   233. 

Gidney,  W.  T.,  353. 

Gifford,  48,  49,  50,   51. 

Ginzberg,  L.,   54,  221. 

Gladstone,  W.   E.,  276,  317. 

Glenelg,   Lord,   233. 

Goethe's  Faust,  Hebrew  translation 

of,  306. 

Goldsmid,  Isaac  Lyon,  183. 
Goldsmith,  Oliver,   136,  334,  335. 
Gordon,    S.   L.,    304. 
Graetz,    H.,    44,    62,    71,    72,    117, 

Il8,      119,     I2O,     121,     129,     184, 

187,    188,    189,   228,   287,   350, 

252. 

Grant,  Robert,  233-239. 
Green,  A.  L.,  335. 
Grossman,    Louis,  348. 
Grotius,  214. 

Guarini  and  Luzzatto,  122-128. 
Giidemann,   M.,  65. 
Gunzburg;  see  Stassof  and   Gunz- 

burg. 
Gutzkow's    Uriel    Acosta,    240-246, 

265. 

Haes,  Frank,  92,  93,  96. 

Haggadah,   of   Sarajevo,  91-96. 

Hahn,   Joseph,   129-135. 

Hahn's  Note   Book,    129-133. 

Hai  Gaon,  53,  66. 

Halper,  B.,  9,   18,  274,   304. 

Hamlet,     Hebrew     translation    of, 

304- 

Handel,  265,  290,  291. 
Ha-Tikwah,  by  N.  H.  Imber,  359- 

364. 

Havell,  H.  L.,  40. 
Heine,  H.,  81,  321. 


Henry,   Michael,   311-318. 
Herder,     Johann     Gottfried     von. 

184-190. 

Herder's  Anthology,   184-190. 
Herodotus,  46,  51. 
Herzberg,  A.,   288. 
Herzberg,   Wilhelm,    283-289,   339. 
Hesiod,  51. 
Hillel,  tanna,  53,  251. 
Hoffmann,  G.,   18. 
Homer,   40,    41,    57,    263. 
Huhner,  L.,  176. 
Hurwitz,  Hyman,  216,   217. 
Hutten,    Ulrich   von,    109. 
Huxley,  218,  219. 

Ibn  Ezra,  Abraham,  66,  261,  269; 

see  also  Aben  Ezra. 
Ibn  Gebriol's  Royal  Crown,  77-83. 
Ibn   Gebriol,    Solomon,   77-83,   97. 
Ibn   Habib,   Jacob,    105,    106,    107. 
Idelsohn,  360,  363. 
Imber,  Naphtali  Herz,  359-364. 
Iris,  by   Franz   Delitzsch,  340-346. 
Isaac     Pinto's     Prayer-Book,     171- 

177- 
Isaac's    Lamp    and    Jacob's    Well, 

102-107. 

Israels,  Josef,  307. 
Italia,  Salom,  engraver,  151,  152. 

Jacob  ben  Nissim  of  Kairuwan,  54. 
Jacobs,  Joseph,  84,  88,  89,  90,  270, 

271,  274. 

James,  William,  182. 
Jastrow,  Marcus,  62. 
Jastrow,  Morris,  176. 
Jeff  cry,  213. 

Jellinek,  Adolf,  245,  300,  301. 
Jellinek,  Hermann,  245,  246. 
Jellinek,   Moritz,    245. 
Jerome,  353. 
Jews  of  Barnow,  by  K.  E.  Franzos, 

276-282. 


3G7 


INDEX 


Johanan  ben  Zaccai,   274. 

Johanan  Hakkadosh,  by  Brown- 
ing, 270,  271. 

Johnson,  Samuel,   136. 

Johnson's  Rasselas,  87. 

Josaphat;  see  Barlaam  and  Josa- 
phat. 

Josephus,    32-38,  44,   273- 

Joubert,   no. 

Judah   ha-Levi,   28,   79. 

Judah   the  Prince,   55,   57,   58,   59. 

Judas  Maccabaus,  by  Longfellow, 
290-296. 

Juvenal,  109. 

Kalir,   79. 

Kalisch,    Marcus,   333-339- 

Kalonymos  ben  Kalonymos,    109. 

Karpeles,  Gustav,  81,  82. 

Kaufmann,  David,  287. 

Keats,  John,  95. 

Kimhi,  David,  46,  86,  87. 

King  Lear,  Hebrew  translation  of, 

304- 

Kinnaird,  Douglas,  208,  211. 
Kipling's  Recessional,  193. 
Kirchner,    162. 
Kirkpatrick,    222. 
Kohler,   K.,   273. 
Kohut,  Alexander,  62,   64. 
Kohut,   G.    A.,    172,    174,   175. 
Krassensohn,  N.   P.,  303. 
Krauss,  S.,  34,  330. 
Kuiper,  47. 

Lactantius,  49. 

Lamb,  Caroline,  210. 

Landor,  260-266. 

Lavater,   161 

Lazarus,    Emma,    319-324. 

Lee,   Sidney,   170. 

Leeser,  Isaac,    182,   247,  249,  252, 

254-259. 
Leeser's  Bible,  254-259. 


Leibnitz,    109. 

Leon    Modena's    Rites,    136-143. 

Lessing,    166-170,    184,     188,    194, 

269,  273,  303. 
Lessing's   First   Jewish   Play,    166- 

170. 

Letteris,  Meir,  306. 
Letters   from    Obscure    Men,    108- 

iiS- 

Levi,  David,  254. 
Levi,   Lyon,   201. 
Levy,  S.,   101. 
Life  Thoughts,  by  Michael  Henry, 

311-318. 

Lilien,  E.  M.,  95. 
Longfellow,   290-296. 
Longinus,   39-45. 

Lucas,  Mrs.  Henry,  77,  80,  98,  99. 
Luria,  Isaac,  28,  158. 
Luther's  version  of  the  Bible,  309. 
Luzzatto,   Moses  Hayyim,   122-128. 
Lyon,  Solomon,  211. 
Lytton,  Bulwer,  207,  213. 

Macaulay,    Thomas,    58,    159,    277. 
MacDonald,   George,  276. 
Mackay,  popular  versifier,  317. 
Maimonides,  24,  58,  84,   140. 
Mallock,    W.    H.,    337. 
Mandelkern,  S.,  213. 
Marlowe,   Chris.,    194. 
Martyrologies   of   the   Jews,    68. 
Massel,  Joseph,  291. 
Meir,  tanna,  244. 
Meisel,  W.  A.,   86. 
Menasseh  ben  Israel,   147-151. 
Mendelssohn,     Moses,     166,      167, 

178-183,    187,   188,    189. 
Mendelssohn's  Jerusalem,   178-183, 

254,  269,  303,  313. 
Mendes,  F.  de   Sola,  287. 
Menorat  ho-Maor,   102-107. 
Meor  'Enayim,    116-121. 
Michaelis,    167. 


368 


INDEX 


Middleton's  Descriptive  Catalogue 

of      the      Etched      Work      of 

Rembrandt,    149. 
Mieses,  Fabius,  303. 
Milton,  John,   36,   237,  306. 
Modena,  Leon,  136-143,  166. 
Moliere,  227. 

Montefiore,  C.   G.,  29,  343. 
Montefiore,   Sir   Moses,    168. 
Monypenny,  226,  227,  228,  229. 
Moore,  Thomas,  200,  213. 
More,   Sir  Thomas,   113. 
Moses,   Longinus  on,  40,  41. 
Miiller,  Johann  Conrad,  161. 
Miiller,  Max,  66. 
Miiller  and  Schlossar,  publishers  of 

Haggadah,    91. 
Murray,   Fairfax,    151. 
Murray,  Gilbert,  on  "  The  Rise  of 

the  Greek  Epic,"  57. 
Murray,  John,  207,  208. 
Murray's  Palestine  Handbook,  354, 

355- 
Musafia,  Benjamin,  6a. 

Nathan  of  Rome's  Dictionary,  60- 

66. 

Nathan,  Isaac,  194,  207-213. 
Neubauer,  A.,  55,  56,  69. 
Niemeyer,   168. 
Nieto,    Isaac,   171,    172. 
Nordlinger,     Joseph;     see     Hahn, 

Joseph. 
Nusbiegel,  G.,   161. 

Ockley,   139. 
Oesterly,   136. 
Orr,  Mrs.  Sutherland,  271. 
Othello,  Hebrew  translation  of,  303- 
310. 

Paradise  Lost,  Hebrew  translation 

of,  306. 

Pascal,    109,    113,   261. 
Pass,  Ernest  de,  316. 


Pastor  Fido,  by  Guarini,    122-128. 

Path  and  Goal,  by  Marcus  Kalisch, 
333-339- 

Pfefferkorn,   no,   112,   113,  288. 

Philippson,   Ludwig,   254. 

Philipson,  David,  348. 

Philo,  24-31,   35,  44,   120. 

Phoenix  of  Ezekielos,   the,  46-52. 

Picart,    Bernard,    162. 

Piedra  Gloriosa,   147,   151,   153. 

Pinto,  Isaac,  171-177. 

Pinto,  Joseph  Jesurun,  174,    175. 

Piyyut    by    Bar    Abun,    97-101. 

Plato,  337. 

Pliny,   33- 

Plutarch,    44. 

Pompey,  43. 

Pool,    David,    171. 

Possart,    170. 

Pronaos,  by   I.   M.   Wise,   347-352. 

Prothero,  211. 

\ 

Rabelais,    109. 

Rashi,  63,  65. 

Raspe,  Rudolf  Eric,  194. 

Reinach,  Theodore,  41,  42,  43,  44. 

Rejected     Addresses,     by     Horace 
Smith,    199-204. 

Rembrandt,  147-151. 

Renan,    E.,    108. 

Reuchlin,  J.,  in,  112,  115. 

Roth,    C.  M.,   161. 

Rousseau,  184. 

Romeo  and  Juliet,  Hebrew   trans- 
lation of,  304,  310. 

Rothschild,   James,    305. 

Rothschild,  Lionel  de,  336. 

Royal  Crown,  by   Ibn  Gebriol,  77- 
83- 

Rubin,  Salomo,  241. 

Ruskin,  307. 

Sa'adya,  46. 
Sabbatai   Zevi,   228. 


INDEX 


Sachs,   Michael,   78,   79,  80. 
Sacred   Poems,    by    Robert    Grant, 

233-239. 

Salaman,    Mrs.    R.    N.,    77,    97. 
Salfeld,  69,  70. 
Salkind,   Solomon,  305. 
Salkinson,   I.   E.,   303-310. 
Schiller,  F.,  305. 

Salomon;  see  Alfieri  and  Salomon. 
Samuels,  M.,   183. 
Sarajevo  Haggadah,  the,  91-96,  132. 
Sc  hell  ing,  214. 

Schlegel's    translation     of     Shake- 
speare, 305. 
Schlossar,  see  Muller  and   Schlos- 

ser. 

Schmidt,  Caesar,  286. 
Schopenhauer,  A.,  82. 
Schudt,  anti-Semite,  114,  115,  288. 
Schurer,  E.,  43,  44. 
Schurzfleisch,  42. 
Scott,  Walter,   193,   194,   195,   196, 

200,  204,  aio. 
Scott's    Ivanhoe,     193,     194,     196, 

231- 
Shakespeare,  William,  89,  184,  214, 

224,  274,  294. 
Hebrew  translations  from,    303- 

310. 

Sheridan,   333. 
Sherira,   Letter   of,    53-59. 
Sidney,  Philip,  266. 
Singer,   Simeon,  32,   172,   173,  248, 

300. 

Slousch,  Nahum,  306. 
Smith,    Horace,    of    the    Rejected 

Addresses,  199-204. 
Smith,    James,     of    the    Rejected 

Addresses,    199-204. 
Smolenskin,   Perez,   303,   309,  310. 
Solomon,  S.  J.,  95. 
Solomons,    I.,    150,    151,    152. 
Sorrows  of    Tatnu,  the,  67-73. 
Spicer,  H.,  240. 


Spinoza,    Baruch,     181,    241,    242. 

244,   245. 
Spirit     of     Judaism,      by      Grace* 

Aguilar,    247-253. 
Stassof   and   Gunzburg,   publishers 

of  the  Haggadah,  91. 
Steele,   Richard,    114,    115. 
Steinschneider,    M.,    78,    88,    175. 
Stern,   69. 
Stevenson,  213. 
Stiles,  Ezra,  176,   177. 
Stobbe,  69. 

Stokes,    Francis   Griffin,    in,    114. 
Sublime,    Caecilius    on   the,   39-45. 
Suidas,  42. 
Sully,  James,   184. 
Surrenhusius"  Latin  Mishnah,  162. 
Swift,   J.,    112. 
Swinburne,  A.  C.,  207. 
Symonds,    John    Addington,     123^ 

124. 

Tacitus,  34. 

Tatnu,   Sorrows  of,   67-73. 
Tennyson,  Alfred,    290,   317,    318. 
Tent   Work  in  Palestine,  by   Con- 

der,    325-332. 
Tertullian,   72. 
Thackeray,  H.  St.  J.,  119. 
Theobald,    309. 
Theocritus,    128. 
Therapeutae,    26,    28. 
Thomson,   325. 
Tiberius,  emperor,  33. 
Titus,   61,   117. 

Treitschke,   German   historian,   71.. 
Tree,  Herbert,  240. 
Trench,    186. 

Uriel    Acosta,    by    Gutzkow,    240- 
246. 


Vaughan,  Henry,  238. 
Yaughan,   R.,   162. 


370 


INDEX 


Vogelstein,   62. 
Voltaire,  109,  175,  303. 
Vossius,    Isaac,    147,    149. 

Wagenseil,  288. 

Walker,    George,    191-198. 

Walker's    Theodore    Cyphon,    191- 

198. 

Wellhausen,  Julius,   186,  333,  350. 
Wendland,  26. 
Wharton,   Edith,  112. 
Whewell's  Astronomy,   222. 
White,  Joseph  Blanco,  220-225. 
Williamson,  154. 


Wise,    Isaac    Mayer,    347-352. 
Wolf,  Lucien,   226. 
Wordsworth,   William,    166. 

Yellin,  David,  362. 
Yellin  method,  the,  248. 
Yosif  Omes,  by  Joseph  Hahn,  129- 
135- 

Zangwill,  Israel,  80,  88,  228,   240, 

359- 

Zedner,  J.,   103. 
Zunz,    Leopold,   97,    98,    102,    116, 

1 1 8,    119,   120,   254. 


t  Bort  (gafftmore 

BALTIMORE,   UD.,   U.   8. 


871 


Form 


University  of  California 

SOUTHERN  REGIONAL  LIBRARY  FACILITY 

405  Hilgard  Avenue,  Los  Angeles,  CA  90024-1388 

Return  this  material  to  the  library 

from  which  it  was  borrowed. 

NON-RENEWABLE 

SEP  1 5  19B3 
DUE  2  WKS  FROM  DATf  RECEIVED 


REC'L  URL  CIRC 

SEP  29  1993 


UC  SOUTHERN  REG    NAL       W    ACIUTV 


Illllllll  li  iiin  •»"••"" 

A    000073487     1 


